Of lost monkeys and broken vehicles

[X Oristos]

Honestly I wouldn’t be surprised if Italy lost hardly anything at all. Since they’ve avoided being destroyed by the Germans ITTL there’s going to be plenty of Italian veterans on the Allies side. I expect it’s conquests under Mussolini to be returned to their rightful owners but I can see them keeping the rest. I wouldn’t be surprised if after the war there’s a big push of an “innocent Italy” myth where it was all Mussolini and Italy was just led astray. Plus Yugoslavia is likely going to be to busy fighting it’s civil war to push for and/or secure border changes

Certainly the colonial holdings and Fiume are written off. But if they manage to present themselves as both "reformed" and more importantly useful, then I wouldn't be surprised if the whole pre-war Istria was retained.

Ι think a 1945 Italy will have a strong vested interest in what happens in Slovenia, since it provides the link between Trieste and any central european markets that might end up in the western camp. For example, if Austria becomes a NATO country instead of a neutral one, then its links with Italy would be important.

 

[Quinkana]

Honestly I wouldn’t be surprised if Italy lost hardly anything at all. Since they’ve avoided being destroyed by the Germans ITTL there’s going to be plenty of Italian veterans on the Allies side. I expect it’s conquests under Mussolini to be returned to their rightful owners but I can see them keeping the rest. I wouldn’t be surprised if after the war there’s a big push of an “innocent Italy” myth where it was all Mussolini and Italy was just led astray. Plus Yugoslavia is likely going to be to busy fighting it’s civil war to push for and/or secure border changes.

Tbf I agree. There isn't any reason why Italy should lose anything beyond Dalmatia and the islands off the coast especially when the Partisans are very much pro-soviet and the Wallies with the Italian army are there to stop it from happening in the first place.

I’m kind of side stepping the Constantinople argument since I feel both sides have points. That being said if Greece has to give anything up for getting Caria they’re getting screwed by the allies. Even if it wasn’t directly stated, in my mind the Dodecanese and Caria were the “Price of Admission” if you will. Those were alway going to be Greek when this whole thing was over. It’s their reward for being the only Western Ally to maintain its hold on European soil and being probably the fifth most important ally in the war. So if they have to sacrifice something for either one they’re getting the short end of the stick.

Tbf true, it's just that considering who Stalin is him trading Germany and probably Poland (prob with a series of annexations for Belarus and Ukraine) for the annexation of Asiatic Constantinople and the Marmara is very possible. I could defo see the greeks attempting to go to the Marmara region first, but the fact that it's piss off every major party and their friendship with Poland I can see the greeks restraining themselves. The fact that the Soviets are the ones annexing it makes things complicated for the Turks too, as the loss of Asiatic Constantinople would make them have basically no friends they can rely on (and with Turkey most likely being split between an Anglo-American and Soviet zones which become de facto rival states) which would probably make them part of the neutral camp at the end.

I see Greece not being happy with it, with them shifting to be American allies and them pushing for Cyprus more aggressively and support Israel against the British and Arabs.

PS if we get a western allied Poland what'll their borders be? They defo won't be getting Pomerania but I could see them getting Upper Silesia while Pomerania stays wholly German, with Prussia (or whatever the WAllies can take) be taken by Poland?

 

[Duke of Orlando]

Certainly the colonial holdings and Fiume are written off. But if they manage to present themselves as both "reformed" and more importantly useful, then I wouldn't be surprised if the whole pre-war Istria was retained.

Ι think a 1945 Italy will have a strong vested interest in what happens in Slovenia, since it provides the link between Trieste and any central european markets that might end up in the western camp. For example, if Austria becomes a NATO country instead of a neutral one, then its links with Italy would be important.

I honestly can even see a world where Italy keeps Fiume and maybe even Zara. There’s a decent chance the Italians liberate both and Yugoslavia might not be in any state to contest them since both cities are majority Italians and my have Allied Italian troops in them. It really depends on what Yugoslavia looks like after the war.

 

[Lascaris]

There is the famous plot of the Greek Comunist Party to kill Churchill in Athens that was deactivate in the last minute. I am wondering...

The Greek Communist party is an unhappy but still legal part of the political spectrum. Greek politics have their problems but government lack of legitimacy in 1944 is not one of them.

Oh my God! Did not expect this. But makes sense. No Catastrophe, Stergiadis is probably the second most respected Greek politician outside Greece. Incorruptible, inflexible, intemperate. Yeah who else to take the poison bill.

To quote once more admiral Shannon Foraker, Republic of Haven Navy "oups"

So Greece is going for the "International City" option but with the long term objective of changing the facts on the ground over time by controlling the hinterland either side of Constantinople. It's the smart move - in due course the British and Americans will likely want to give up their zones which will lead to a Greek administered "West Constantinople" and once the USSR collapses they can absorb the Soviet zone as well. It will take fifty years but eventually Greece will win it all, and in the short term by "giving up" on the number one teratorial claim they can probably win concessions elsewhere.

The obvious role model for the Greeks here is Crete after 1896. Or Cyprus I suppose but that hasn't happened yet in 1943 and may well never happen.

Greece really should send lobbyists to the WAllies at best in order to give them convincing arguments to let them take the city so that they’ll actually consider giving support. If I were in the Greek leadership I’d do that.

The Greek War Relief Association would like a war with you. And one might wonder what 20th Century Fox may be producing during the war years...

Wouldn’t regaining a city that’s been valued highly by the Orthodox Churches still be viewed positively? The Russian Orthodox Church declared Moscow the next Rome after Constantinople fell which showed how they felt about the city. Also Stalin and future Soviet leaders will try to use religion as a way to get on Greece’s good side if they can’t get the straits. Appealing to the Orthodox faith and congratulating the Greeks for taking back the city would be a good way to get more positive image in the country.

The Russians historically tried either to control the patriarchate or turn the Russian church to primus inter pares within the Orthodox war. Stalin trying to meddle which is hardly impossible, would likely backfire rather badly in Athens... this is how poor Maximos V resigned due to... psychological problems.

I guess it will be mentioned later, but I absolutely doubt that the Greek political class would ever accept giving up on Constantinople without first ensuring that Cyprus at least is going to become Greek unconditionally (appart from potential bases) right after the war.

And what are they going to do about it? Annex the City unilaterally and forcibly expel the Turkish population against the wishes of the big three? If the United States freezes lend lease to Greece, one notes they did exactly this to France, freezing the arming of additional French divisions, how the Greek army will be kept in supply to continue operations in the Balkans? One notes for the American high command the Balkan front is still Churchill's folly they are accepting it TTL since the Greek and Yugoslav divisions are available but still consider it of tertiary importance at best. Who is keeping the Greek drachma floating and from hyperinflation at the moment?

We should have in mind that the consent of the Greek political class for Constantinople is crucial. Not that the Great Powers cannot force their will to Greece, but we are still in 1943. War bonds in the US are of great importance and the Greek war effort has been extensively used to promote them, IIRC. Having the Greeks speaking of backstabbing in the middle of the war, would not help the bonds. Selling off the brave Greeks (who would most probably liberate the City) for whom? The Turks and the Reds? Remember that the press by that time has still a high degree of freedom, it's not the Cold War yet.

One notes Roosevelt is extremely popular back home and a canny political operator on his own. He didn't tell the Greeks they cannot annex Constantinople. On the opposite he told them they CAN annex it. "Just have a proper plebiscite pal, which we can show they world. You do understand what you did in 1941 cannot stand up to scrutiny. you had people signing up openly of all things!" What is going to be the Greek line and which line the US papers will follow in the middle of war that coming from the White House or what will be coming from Athens and won't be making much sense in the face of it?

And I didn't understand what Pangalos said. Who would attack the Greek army if it occupied Constantinople? In 1944 or post-war?

How would the Greek army take Constantinople unilaterally if the Americans cut off their supply because they went gallivanting around instead of pursuing agreed Allied war plans? Which again the American DID to the French army.

Even with a slice of the city, I imagine the allies would have to be offering a very large carrot to even have this offer be considered. Some of these can be easily deduced, like the Dodecanese and the old Italian occupation zone in Anatolia. I’m not sure if Cyprus will be on the table, but it would be a big chunk of the carrot if it was. A lot of land in Anatolia is assured(I imagine the most extreme map @Vaeius made is likely) And Bulgaria is likely to lose some territory as well. If Cyprus isn’t offered I think we would see even harsher territorial concessions from Bulgaria. Maybe a bit more from Turkey, although they’ve already lost as much as I could imagine.

Cyprus will depend on Britain and at least the Colonial office will be arguing any decision on it should be independent of whatever else happens to Greece... or Turkey.

Greece is an economical lly devastated army. The Wallies are not going to opt for a war that could blow up the whole Yalta arrangements just so Greece can have Scutari and Chalkedona. Not when they have an adequate enough option from their POV.

Greece has no reason to want them in the first place. Economy wise Greece had lost half her GDP by 1944 in OTL. TTL the impact is likely to be relatively smaller, after all half the country including its main industrial core avoided occupation. Still...

Khrushchev could force Greece to be neutral if it means getting the city and a part of the straits back. Though I highly doubt the WAllies will let Greece say yes.

Good luck with that...

The Lazi will most likely get labeled as Muslim Georgians, and unfortunately Stalin may deport them like he did to some Lazi in OTL.

I think the only problem I can think of so far is that the Armenian diaspora is way bigger than the Georgian one. So I won’t be surprised if Armenians outnumber Georgians in the lands that Georgia gets, which can set up a very bad ethnic conflict.

I'd note TTL the Soviet-Turkish border already is the 1914 one...

I cannot see Britain agreeing to Turkey becoming a soviet vassal with the possibility of Antalya and Mersin hosting the Red Fleet. Biga is already a major concession and that's due to Americans being short-sighted. But as you said, the Dardanelles can be controlled from Moudros, where I expect the OTL german base construction to be vastly expanded. And if Lemnos is neutralized by e.g. the soviet air force, then there is always Souda.

But Soviet open sea bases? While Britain still controls Suez? That would be an anathema for Whitehall. Therefore, I think that Biga and Asiatic Constantinople is all what Stalin gets.

Churchill even in OTL had to give lip service to Soviet concerns on the straits. Plus IMS used the Soviet threat to get Inonu on the side of the Allies. TTL sure he can refuse to cooperate but that would be coming at a cost, not least with the Americans and the Soviets are still tying down two thirds of the Wehrmacht and doing most of the dying...

They can fortify Biga to turn it into a fortress. Reinforced concrete pens for submarines, forts protecting it from both Asiatic Greece and an amphibious invasion. More bunkers than Hoxha could even dream of. A very big Gibraltar that will have to withstand siege only for so long. After all, with the Black Sea being a soviet lake, reinforcements would be able to arrive.

They can... of course the cynic notes the place doesn't have all that many ports open to the Aegean...

 

[TickTock The Witch's Dead]

The Russians historically tried either to control the patriarchate or turn the Russian church to primus inter pares within the Orthodox war. Stalin trying to meddle which is hardly impossible, would likely backfire rather badly in Athens... this is how poor Maximos V resigned due to... psychological problems.

I wouldn't be surprised if future Soviet leaders tried gaining influence of Greece through the church. Could have some serious consequences for the Orthodox faith.

That being said, I imagine that the attempts to do so can lead to some serious chaos with pro-Western Orthodox Greeks clashing with the pro-Soviet Orthodox Greeks. That or the Greek state tries to crack down on Soviet influence in the church. I wouldn't be surprised if the attempts by the Soviets to appeal to the church fail spectacularly.

 

[Andreas]

For the sake of the discussion, there's a very interesting article concerning the US-French relations during WWII IOTL, which explain why the US policy was harsh on France, but doing the same against TTL Greece would be politicaly costly, since Greece has none of the OTL French features.

When the US wanted to take over France

Open access // by Annie Lacroix-Riz (Le Monde diplomatique - English edition, May 2003)

mondediplo.com

 

[TickTock The Witch's Dead]

For the sake of the discussion, there's a very interesting article concerning the US-French relations during WWII IOTL, which explain why the US policy was harsh on France, but doing the same against TTL Greece would be politicaly costly, since Greece has none of the OTL French features.

When the US wanted to take over France

Open access // by Annie Lacroix-Riz (Le Monde diplomatique - English edition, May 2003)

mondediplo.com

Imagine if the US was dead serious on at least most of its original plan on France. Immediate decolonization of the French empire would be one good thing that would come out of it especially for Algeria and Vietnam.

 

[Vaeius]

You know for all the arguments over Constantinople here I could easily see it being the source of constant in-universe arguments, kerfuffles, subterfuge, and decades worth of headaches for diplomats and politicians the world over on both sides of the iron curtain wherever it may fall. The 'Queen of Cities' might very well be called the 'Queen of Headaches' before long in certain circles as the Cold War takes root, no matter what it's immediate post-war status might be.

The Greek War Relief Association would like a war with you. And one might wonder what 20th Century Fox may be producing during the war years...

I'd wager the Greek classics get a bit more attention, probably with a big Buy War Bonds cut at the end. Or maybe something like Casablanca gets set in Constantinople? That'd be neat.

Actually now that I think of it, what might Disney or other animators be making in between Der Fuhrer's Face and the... let's say 'questionable' depictions of the Japanese on the part of American animation?

Bugs Bunny, and the Queen in the City!

I can see the rabbit in drag and severely problematic racial stereotyping now! Those bonds'll sell like like hotcakes I tells ya!

One notes Roosevelt is extremely popular back home and a canny political operator on his own. He didn't tell the Greeks they cannot annex Constantinople. On the opposite he told them they CAN annex it. "Just have a proper plebiscite pal, which we can show they world. You do understand what you did in 1941 cannot stand up to scrutiny. you had people signing up openly of all things!" What is going to be the Greek line and which line the US papers will follow in the middle of war that coming from the White House or what will be coming from Athens and won't be making much sense in the face of it?

It was quite a clever move on his part if not one likely to be remembered 'fondly'. Kind of a jerk way to treat an ally that managed to keep a foothold open in Europe. Yet it might also be worth noting that Roosevelt soured a bit on Stalin shortly before his death when he broke his word at Yalta, nor will he live forever. Though thinking on that it might be nice to see some butterfly let him attend the UN's founding. Say what one will about the man, and there is a lot to be said, but I always found that a bit tragic considering how hard he pushed for it.

Regardless, if Stalin overplays his hand somewhere such a thing might happen earlier to some degree. His paranoia has worked against him more than once already ttl and for all that he is usually a rational if horrifically monstrous operator, usually is the key word and VE day is still a long way off.

On a much grimmer note, how's Manhattan doing? I don't remember if there were any stray butterflies relating to that particular city.

 

[Thoresby]

And what are they going to do about it? Annex the City unilaterally and forcibly expel the Turkish population against the wishes of the big three? If the United States freezes lend lease to Greece, one notes they did exactly this to France, freezing the arming of additional French divisions, how the Greek army will be kept in supply to continue operations in the Balkans? One notes for the American high command the Balkan front is still Churchill's folly they are accepting it TTL since the Greek and Yugoslav divisions are available but still consider it of tertiary importance at best. Who is keeping the Greek drachma floating and from hyperinflation at the moment?

The problem/opportunity for the Greeks is their influence with the Western "Big Two" and their dependence varies over time and is relatively uncorrelated. For example during the initial invasion they were totally dependent on British aid but after the North African front was closed they had a bargaining position as the sole active WAllied front. With the entry of Turkey and the opening of the Syrian front that status is lost and further weakened with the invasion of Italy and then will totally disappear with the invasion of France. But as more of Greece is liberated and as Axis forces in the Balkan theatre weaken Greek dependence will weaken. For example if the US completely cuts off aid in late 1944 while it would be dire for the Greek economy Germany isn't going to be able to go on the offensive and push the Greek Army back. Would an early end to US aid be a price worth paying to create facts on the ground? That's a judgment the Greeks will have to make at that time.

 

[X Oristos]

By the way, I would have never guessed Stergiadis becoming PM. Very well played played Mr @Lascaris

The problem/opportunity for the Greeks is their influence with the Western "Big Two" and their dependence varies over time and is relatively uncorrelated. For example during the initial invasion they were totally dependent on British aid but after the North African front was closed they had a bargaining position as the sole active WAllied front. With the entry of Turkey and the opening of the Syrian front that status is lost and further weakened with the invasion of Italy and then will totally disappear with the invasion of France. But as more of Greece is liberated and as Axis forces in the Balkan theatre weaken Greek dependence will weaken. For example if the US completely cuts off aid in late 1944 while it would be dire for the Greek economy Germany isn't going to be able to go on the offensive and push the Greek Army back. Would an early end to US aid be a price worth paying to create facts on the ground? That's a judgment the Greeks will have to make at that time.

There is now a Liberal PM, even if he will stay long enough just to take the fall for Constantinople. There is one thing the greek political elite knew and Venizelos' Liberal heirs knew even better: never go against the dominant naval power. The world is changing and control of the oceans is moving from London to DC. Greeks will try to find the maximum possible wiggle room but there are few chances they will go against the mistress of the seas.

 

[Andreas]

The problem/opportunity for the Greeks is their influence with the Western "Big Two" and their dependence varies over time and is relatively uncorrelated. For example during the initial invasion they were totally dependent on British aid but after the North African front was closed they had a bargaining position as the sole active WAllied front. With the entry of Turkey and the opening of the Syrian front that status is lost and further weakened with the invasion of Italy and then will totally disappear with the invasion of France. But as more of Greece is liberated and as Axis forces in the Balkan theatre weaken Greek dependence will weaken. For example if the US completely cuts off aid in late 1944 while it would be dire for the Greek economy Germany isn't going to be able to go on the offensive and push the Greek Army back. Would an early end to US aid be a price worth paying to create facts on the ground? That's a judgment the Greeks will have to make at that time.

Totally agree.
But, furthermore, with the imminent fall of Bulgaria (I don't think anyone doubts that ITTL) and the eventual capitulation of Turkey (don't think anyone doubts that as well), while the Wallies are about to open the main front in France, the Greek position will be strengthened again.
When this happen, how many boots are the Wallies (especially the US) going to keep in the Balkans and Turkey?
Which army is more capable and available to keep an eye on Bulgaria and Turkey?
Are the Wallies sure that things are going to develop smoothly in Yugoslavia? If needed, who can provide military assistance to the legitimate Yugoslav government?
Last but not least, by allienating Greece, are the Western interests of neutralising the USSR control of the Straits, through the control of the Aegean served?
Therefore, in rhe case of a Greek hard game, I can't see the Wallies behaving Greece as a hostile country. Especially since Britain has so much interest in all of the above, even if Mr Roosevelt can't understand the implications. And while having the Soviets declaring against Japan is important for the US, it means next to nothing for the British at the moment.

Anyway, the author has made an absolutely respected decision for this TL.
And the stance of the Allies is definitely plausible.
But what strikes me as weird is the ease with which the Greek politicians accepted everything, with virtually nothing in return.
So, I 'd expect a severe political upheaval in Greece and a (at least initially) failure of the Western policy in the Balkans and Asia Minor.

 

[Duke of Orlando]

Totally agree.
But, furthermore, with the imminent fall of Bulgaria (I don't think anyone doubts that ITTL) and the eventual capitulation of Turkey (don't think anyone doubts that as well), while the Wallies are about to open the main front in France, the Greek position will be strengthened again.
When this happen, how many boots are the Wallies (especially the US) going to keep in the Balkans and Turkey?
Which army is more capable and available to keep an eye on Bulgaria and Turkey?
Are the Wallies sure that things are going to develop smoothly in Yugoslavia? If needed, who can provide military assistance to the legitimate Yugoslav government?
Last but not least, by allienating Greece, are the Western interests of neutralising the USSR control of the Straits, through the control of the Aegean served?
Therefore, in rhe case of a Greek hard game, I can't see the Wallies behaving Greece as a hostile country. Especially since Britain has so much interest in all of the above, even if Mr Roosevelt can't understand the implications. And while having the Soviets declaring against Japan is important for the US, it means next to nothing for the British at the moment.

Anyway, the author has made an absolutely respected decision for this TL.
And the stance of the Allies is definitely plausible.
But what strikes me as weird is the ease with which the Greek politicians accepted everything, with virtually nothing in return.
So, I 'd expect a severe political upheaval in Greece and a (at least initially) failure of the Western policy in the Balkans and Asia Minor.

I’d be hesitant to say they’re getting virtually nothing in return. I have to imagine that the Western Allies had to offer one hell of a carrot in return to get the Greeks to accept. Honestly we might be underestimating what the Greeks are getting by a large margin, not just in land but also economically and possibly in people. I’m not sure if Pomaks are still one one of the Muslim minority groups that Greece prefers but they and their majority land in Bulgaria could be a large boon as the majority of the population would stay. Maybe the allies would offer economic aid to any group like that who wants to migrate to Greece. Part of the deal might be that the UK would “strongly encourage” Assyrians to migrate to Greece on the UK’s dime, sidestepping that inevitable post war mess by making it just the Arabs and the Kurds fighting over the same land. Why would this be appealing? Because one of the biggest constraints to how much land they take is how many people they have to fill it. The more people they have/don’t need to move the better.

 

[Lascaris]

Thank you for your reply Lascaris!

However I think you didn't understand what I was saying, or I failed to make my point clear.

To start with, no, I don't think Greece can nor wants to get everything around the Straits, especially the Asian side. Greece has been very reasonable so far ITTL, and there's no reason to change its attitude.

Actually, Greece would (and should) even agree to an internationalised Constantinople (European side) if there weren't two issues:
1. The referendum in 1940 and the proclamation of the union in 1941. The Patriarch had become a martyr exactly because of that proclamation!! After the performance of the Greek Army all through the war, the prestige the country gained all over the western world and the sacrifices of the Greek people, everyone would expect that the union would be recognised eventually.

I wouldn't put too much weight in the Greek referendum. The Greek-Cypriots in OTL conducted not one but TWO such referendums in OTL by collecting signatures in churches one in 1930 and one in 1950, the TTL 1941 referendum is modeled on the 1930 one. The British flatly ignored both and the first wasn't much better received in Athenns at the time, there is a reason it is nearly completely forgotten today. Which of course FDR is taking advantage of here by asking for a "proper" referendum.

2. If the union is not recognised, it would be expected that Greece would get more political control over the European part of the City. But what has been proposed here is actually worse than before the war for the Greeks, as the Allies want them to accept the current demographics which favour the Turks, exactly because of the Turkish actions during the war!!

Are they? The Greeks got told either to do a proper plebiscite or to have Constantinople as a UN free city. In the case of a plebiscite sorry but dead people are not voting. Neither do trees. Unless you are the Greek royalists or the Soviet Union which were inclusive to the dead and with ecological sensibilities.

In the case of a UN free city I would note that the European side of the straits is the western zone. Random photo from 1919

I wasn't aware that the US got assurances that the Soviets would attack Japan if they get bases at the Straits. Maybe I missed it. I also think taht thisnis not a good bargain for the Wallies, and I'd expect Churchill going bersek on this, but then this is your choice for TTL and perfectly respected.

Let me note that if you are learning what I find convenient to let you know.

That doesn't mean though that the Greek politicians have to bow their head without a fight! Especially as this would ve a disaster for the Greek political class IMHO.
So what I proposed is that Greece could occupy the City (possibly both sides), and play hard in order to renegotiate the deal. This would give the Wallies to re-evaluate their stance.
Maybe I wasn't clear: I wasn't talking about direct annexation, but I still find it problematic on the Greek side to simply accept everything, and for the Wallies to simply ignore the Greek people's and political class' sensitivity on the matter. Because, although the deal was designed to accommodate the Soviet interests, it actually favours the Turkish...

Does it? Under no circumstances is Turkey retaining the European side of the straits. In 1945 at least. 50 years down the road... who knows?

Therefore, under these circumstances, I would expect the Greeks going for the referendum option provided by the Allies, ehithout accepting the current demographics as proposed, but ensuring the Turks in the European side won't have the advantage, one way or the other. Then the ball will be on the Allies' side, but in the meantime the relations within the Big Three might ve altered...

As noted dead people cannot vote. On the other hand how would demographics be likely to change in the years after the peace? The Jewish community is, unfortunately gone. The Armenian community besides natural growth is not likely to be getting much in the way of natural immigration. Which leaves Greeks and Turks. The border with Greece is likely to be open, people freely moving back and forth. The Turkish community on the European side on the other hand... how happy is it going to be with the administration in the European side of the city and how likely is immigration from Anatolia... assuming it's open?

 

[Xenophonte]

I think that should be taken into account that even if the Greek government would follow the US 'suggestion', that any future possible referendum on Constantinople. It would probably be depending on what situation would the city and its inhabitants be left after its recapture by the allied troops...
Cause, IMO, it would be two different scenarios, if importance and prestige it would be spared from being bombed as the German or Italian cities. And, if when it will be taken/liberated, it would happen in the same or similar way to (IOTL) París or if rather due to the Turk army and any eventual militants/paramilitary resistance.If Constantinople would suffer the same fate that the one that IOTL, was suffered by Berlin, after that the Red Army had to take it in a house to house fight, with the foreseeable consequences both in casualties and especialy for the civilian population...

 

[DracoLazarus]

I think that should be taken into account that even if the Greek government would follow the US 'suggestion', that any future possible referendum on Constantinople. It would probably be depending on what situation would the city and its inhabitants be left after its recapture by the allied troops...
Cause, IMO, it would be two different scenarios, if importance and prestige it would be spared from being bombed as the German or Italian cities. And, if when it will be taken/liberated, it would happen in the same or similar way to (IOTL) París or if rather due to the Turk army and any eventual militants/paramilitary resistance.If Constantinople would suffer the same fate that the one that IOTL, was suffered by Berlin, after that the Red Army had to take it in a house to house fight, with the foreseeable consequences both in casualties and especialy for the civilian population...

You have to note that Paris was mostly taken fairly easily because the German garrison was taken off-balance by a large-scale FFI insurrection.
Paris is probably how the Warsaw uprising may have gone if there had been Polish Armia Ludowa units near Warsaw in position to rescue it.
But would the Turkish population take part in a Constantinopolitan insurrection ? Most likely not, and the Turkish army units would likely make the non-Turkish population suffer for the fighting either way.
Though if somehow Greek resistance fighters do manage to take the core of Constantinople before being rescued, the balance in favor of a Greek fait accompli would tip immensely, as the resistance fighters would likely do like resistance fighters did everywhere, and turn on the collaborators...
which would mean the Turkish population of West Constantinople.

 

[Xenophonte]

You have to note that Paris was mostly taken fairly easily because the German garrison was taken off-balance by a large-scale FFI insurrection.
Paris is probably how the Warsaw uprising may have gone if there had been Polish Armia Ludowa units near Warsaw in position to rescue it.
But would the Turkish population take part in a Constantinopolitan insurrection ? Most likely not, and the Turkish army units would likely make the non-Turkish population suffer for the fighting either way.
Though if somehow Greek resistance fighters do manage to take the core of Constantinople before being rescued, the balance in favor of a Greek fait accompli would tip immensely, as the resistance fighters would likely do like resistance fighters did everywhere, and turn on the collaborators...
which would mean the Turkish population of West Constantinople.

Indeed, but with Paris, I was using it as a example of aside of the exact causes of a relatively intact capital city being liberated... And it could happen there if the commandants of the Turkey army occupying the city, if/when encircled, would perhaps be given guarantees and persuaded to surrender their command and spare the city and the population from the consequences of an urban combat.
Of course, they could chose to fight to the last able man, hence the aforementioned possibility of an Berlin like kind of scenario, for the liberation of Constantinople...

 

[nickmn]

Indeed, but with Paris, I was using it as a example of aside of the exact causes of a relatively intact capital city being liberated... And it could happen there if the commandants of the Turkey army occupying the city, if/when encircled, would perhaps be given guarantees and persuaded to surrender their command and spare the city and the population from the consequences of an urban combat.
Of course, they could chose to fight to the last able man, hence the aforementioned possibility of an Berlin like kind of scenario, for the liberation of Constantinople...

Honestly , I can't see the greek army fighting a Berlin like battle to take Constantinople and many Turkish civilians surviving the fighting .

 

[X Oristos]

Are they? The Greeks got told either to do a proper plebiscite or to have Constantinople as a UN free city. In the case of a plebiscite sorry but dead people are not voting. Neither do trees. Unless you are the Greek royalists or the Soviet Union which were inclusive to the dead and with ecological sensibilities.

For the non-Greeks: The mention that trees don't vote is a direct reference to the 1961 greek election that was known as the "election of violence and fraud". George Papandreou had famously remarked that "even the trees voted".

1961 Greek legislative election - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Lascaris]

For the non-Greeks: The mention that trees don't vote is a direct reference to the 1961 greek election that was known as the "election of violence and fraud". George Papandreou had famously remarked that "even the trees voted".

1961 Greek legislative election - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The cynic in me would also note the referendums for the return of Constantine in 1920, won with 98.97% of the vote with the number of the voters magically increasing from 750,000 in the elections to over a million three weeks later with every single one of them voting for Constantine and the referendum for the return of the monarchy in 1935 again won by 98% and the voters again magically being more than in the 1932, 1933 1935 and 1936 elections by more than a quarter million. Nevermind the 1935 election when districts that in 1933 and 1936 voted 80-90% republican somehow voted only royalists.

 

[Andreas]

Let me note that if you are learning what I find convenient to let you know.

Therefore, my dear sir, I rest my case and wait patiently for the next updates!!!🤐