Of lost monkeys and broken vehicles

[Whiteshore]

Maybe the Laz get their own SSR but the rest will surely be taken by Armenia and Georgia.

Eh, they’d most likely become part of the Georgian SSR as IIRC, the Laz are basically Islamized Georgians in language and culture, so, yeah, with the USSR practicing state atheism.

 

[phil03]

I'm a Byzantine fanboy lol.

But I do understand why you say this. Greece isn't a kingdom anymore and they probably moved on to pushing their connections with the democratic city states of antiquity rather than its byzantine ties. It'd be more popular bc of the rest of the west pulling on it to glorify their democratic institutions and Greece probably would follow their lead.

But a man can dream.

You are correct in that it'd be highly contentious. I see it being a partisan thing where the former pro monarchy side pushes for a restoration if Constantinople is given to Greece, while the pro republican side pushes for Athens as the capital due to the reasons you stated. And therein lies the main reason why it wouldn't happen: it probably would be too politicised for society to not be united in the decision to do it or not.

I mean, there is that and the fact that I imagine Monarchism is going to recede further and further from the mainstream, with the right being your run-of-the-mill mainstream business types you find all across the West and generally reconcile to Venizelos' legacy, but as a good Atticophile I would respectfully say that I get the impression that your love for Byzantium (which I share to a degree) make you underestimate how much soft power there is in Athens' name, because, well, its fucking Athens!

The number of artistic and intellectual traditions that go back to that place when it was in its full glory is borderline obscene and if ideologies had holly sites Athens would be to Liberal Democracy what Jerusalem is to Christianity and Judaism and Mecca to Islam, the Acropolis would be the equivalent of the Church of the Saint Sepulcher, the Kabbah or the Wall of Lamentation for those same faiths. The memory of Ancient Athens and Democratic ideals are very profoundly intertwined. Like I said in my previous post, those things matter a lot, not just because they matter to the collective West, and therefore to Greece as a country that is part of it and therefore influenced by its overall trend, but because its bound to resonate a lot in the context of WWII's aftermath and the Cold War.

 

[Spatharios]

Since then Athens has re-emerged as a great city of note while Constantinople has declined, to the point that word of god says Athens is bigger at this point and you also have a century of the Greek government building its institutions in Athens. They could be moved, sure, but its really an energy and resource-consuming process with little concrete benefit at the end of the road...

More or less this. Somebody mentioned the Bundestag vote before, and I too see a lot of parallels here. The allure of the former imperial capital is there, but apart from practical purposes, Bonn was also the symbol of the successful, democratic West German state. Likewise, Athens has by now established itself as the capital of a republican, and highly successful, modern Greek state ITTL. In addition, it will have the aura of the Classical legacy, unlike Bonn.

Furthermore, as others have commented, under TTL's Cold War, Constantinople is unlikely to become the behemoth Istanbul is IOTL, so even size-wise the two cities won't be that different, and without having control of northwestern Anatolia, moving the Greek capital to Constantinople means it is literally on the border, exposed to both Turkish and Soviet/Russian attack; as this is not the Middle Ages, where the Theodosian Walls could protect the city, this will be a factor in where the government and military command reside. At most I can see the city, if it is ever annexed by Greece, becoming a ceremonial capital, perhaps with a few ministries or the presidential residence moving there for symbolic purposes.

 

[Whiteshore]

Furthermore, as others have commented, under TTL's Cold War, Constantinople is unlikely to become the behemoth Istanbul is IOTL, so even size-wise the two cities won't be that different, and without having control of northwestern Anatolia, moving the Greek capital to Constantinople means it is literally on the border, exposed to both Turkish and Soviet/Russian attack; as this is not the Middle Ages, where the Theodosian Walls could protect the city, this will be a factor in where the government and military command reside. At most I can see the city, if it is ever annexed by Greece, becoming a ceremonial capital, perhaps with a few ministries or the presidential residence moving there for symbolic purposes.

On that note, Constantinople's size would be more akin to that of Vienna (which is likewise an "Imperial capital without an Empire") without all those Anatolian peasants moving for jobs (which reminds me, where would the Anatolian peasantry be migrating to instead of Istanbul or Izmir ITTL).

 

[Spatharios]

On that note, Constantinople's size would be more akin to that of Vienna (which is likewise an "Imperial capital without an Empire") without all those Anatolian peasants moving for jobs (which reminds me, where would the Anatolian peasantry be migrating to instead of Istanbul or Izmir ITTL).

That is definitely true. However as Turkey participated in WWII in this time line, the post-war population boom will likely be reduced due to deaths, starvation and other privations, destruction of the country, and the loss of its most economically prosperous regions (which were largely lost in the early 1920s and already has knock-on effects in a smaller Turkish economy pre-war). There definitely will be a population boom though, as with all European countries after the war, and without the big western cities (or mass emigration to Western Europe, which is unlikely ITTL) to absorb them (and without the urban, westernized elites playing on their home turf), Turkish politics will be even more interesting. Sivas will definitely become a boom town, but likely the Turkish government will be forced to actually pay attention to Anatolia itself a few decades earlier than OTL.

 

[Gokbay]

which reminds me, where would the Anatolian peasantry be migrating to instead of Istanbul or Izmir ITTL

Sivas is the Capital, Turkey does have some remaining ports which would probably be attractive enough for jobs. Places like Eskişehir, Ankara, Kayseri and maybe Konya might have a draw if they are crossroads/hubs in road/rail infrastructure (which I am pretty sure Eskişehir already is to a degree in comparison to the relatively low amount of rail infrastructure in Turkey).

 

[Quinkana]

I mean, there is that and the fact that I imagine Monarchism is going to recede further and further from the mainstream, with the right being your run-of-the-mill mainstream business types you find all across the West and generally reconcile to Venizelos' legacy, but as a good Atticophile I would respectfully say that I get the impression that your love for Byzantium (which I share to a degree) make you underestimate how much soft power there is in Athens' name, because, well, its fucking Athens!

The number of artistic and intellectual traditions that go back to that place when it was in its full glory is borderline obscene and if ideologies had holly sites Athens would be to Liberal Democracy what Jerusalem is to Christianity and Judaism and Mecca to Islam, the Acropolis would be the equivalent of the Church of the Saint Sepulcher, the Kabbah or the Wall of Lamentation for those same faiths. The memory of Ancient Athens and Democratic ideals are very profoundly intertwined. Like I said in my previous post, those things matter a lot, not just because they matter to the collective West, and therefore to Greece as a country that is part of it and therefore influenced by its overall trend, but because its bound to resonate a lot in the context of WWII's aftermath and the Cold War.

No I understand the power of Athens as the face of Greek antiquity, which is what I said about it. Athens is the second best choice just bc I like the associations with Byzantium more.

But I think the Greeks would choose something that's more focused on republicanism of which Athens fits the bill perfectly.

Sivas is the Capital, Turkey does have some remaining ports which would probably be attractive enough for jobs. Places like Eskişehir, Ankara, Kayseri and maybe Konya might have a draw if they are crossroads/hubs in road/rail infrastructure (which I am pretty sure Eskişehir already is to a degree in comparison to the relatively low amount of rail infrastructure in Turkey).

I'm pretty sure they'd get a boom town in one of the port cities too. Maybe Samsun? or something else...

One thing I find very interesting is the Ankara is a small town ittl. Since Ankara is seen as too close to the Greeks and too far from Allah there's not much they can do about it too. Erzurum is controlled by the USSR too so that means more Turks are centred in less cities. Hell Uskudar isn't a viable option too, which would've been a viable alternative to Constantinople if it wasn't controlled by the USSR...

One possibility that would have a different fate than otl is Samsun. With the Black Sea trade being a viable option the USSR may ship the stuff it wants to trade with turkey through the Black Sea ports, and Samsun is the biggest Black Sea port in turkey.

 

[Lascaris]

I think this is a multi tiered question. In the eastern Anatolian lands taken by Russia, yes I do expect ethnic cleansing of Turks. Either sending them off to Central Asia or sending them back to Turkey. That’s not land the Russians are ever going to want to give up and clearing it out likely assures Armenian and Georgian loyalty for the near term. I expect the Laz and other minority groups are allowed to stay though. The Kurds may be forced out though depending on what the Russians take. Maybe the Laz get their own SSR but the rest will surely be taken by Armenia and Georgia.

Let me only point that TTL Soviet Union already has the 1914 border since 1921, what it actually tried to gain back in OTL 1946. Of course Stalin can very much go and claim Wilsonian Armenia. On the other hand this depends on balancing between securing more territory and securing territory from Turkey. The Soviets already hold everything to the east of the red line TTL. West of that line by 1945 the population is overwhelmingly Turkish. Map courtesy from Wikipedia:

I expect Canakkale won’t be cleansed to provide a counter weight to the local Greeks. Especially if there’s an election that decides the fate of Constantinople and Canakkale as the old League of Nations dictated, the Turks there are very important voters to prevent it from going to the Greeks. So I don’t believe they’ll be forced out but some could very easily decide to leave for Turkey anyway. That wouldn’t be terribly surprising.

The local Greeks run out en masse when the Turkish army invaded in February 1941, unlike Uskudar/Chalcedon outright all out war was underway. So the question is how many of them would care to return in 1944/45 after four years of war and when Greek newspapers are likely full of stories of Soviet Greeks being expelled to Greece and exiled Poles not wanting to return to Poland.

As for Uskudar it’s probably the most uncertain for me. If you cleanse it you certainly make an enemy of Turkey for the long term, and if you don’t you have an excellent carrot that you can dangle in front of Turkey repeatedly until you have to actually use it. I can’t see the Soviets ever wanting to give it back though. It’s to valuable. So I wouldn’t be surprised if it was never official policy but life would slowly become harder and harder for the Turks and they start to leave only to be replaced by Russians. I definitely think the area could replace Kaliningrad as the Soviet colonization project though.

The Soviets are not annexing Uskudar. The one big question on which truth to tell I'm undecided is whether you have a population exchange between the two halves of greater Constantinople. This being 1945 there will likely be strong voices in favor... but on the other hand this will be tantamount to saying "hey European half gets annexed to Greece"

I think the Kurds will be given their piece, and as the USSR wouldn't want them (any potential SSR would be right next to Kurdistan) I think they'll just kick them into Kurdistan proper. I've no idea how Assyria will fare but if they manage with Iran's help the USSR may also treat them badly too.

The Kurds are a British puppet ally at the moment. But an independent Kurdistan is pretty much a given at the moment. You have had a provisional government fighting on the side of the Allies with a considerable army since 1941. How do you put that genie back in the bottle? Tell the Kurds "nice of you getting killed in a revolt we instigated for the past four years, now please become nice good subjects of Sivas anf Baghdad" and let the Turkish army and the Arab Legion kill them?

One thing that I think is true ittl is that Iran is a lot more able to do foreign policy ittl. Kurdistan probably would be a great ally already.

An Iranian Kurdish alliance is not a given. After all what will be the largest Kurdish minority outside Kurdish control TTL?

I definitely see Greece and Turkey agitating over it when the USSR shows weakness. I could see the Russians being more fine with Greece taking over than the Muslims...

Greece is a close American ally. That's anathema for Moscow...

I think that's putting the cart a few decades before the horse-but if Greece winds up with Constantinople after the cold war, I could see a move happening, albeit I think it'll be a more divisive thing than many of us might think. I could totally imagine a Greek version of the very close Bundestag vote on relocating the capital to Berlin (which broke down almost entirely on regional lines).
A good read on potential industrialization tho-I had assumed that cutting the city and its hinterland in half would stunt the growth of the western side, but then again, West Berlin did fairly well economically-and Constantinople won't be an enclave in hostile territory.

In 1990 Athens will be capital for the last 160 years. Bonn was capital for 40 and during the whole period supposed to be the temporary capital.

All this to say that while someone of the more nationalist members of the Greek parliament might very well raise the idea it would IMO be scoffed off by most of their colleagues.

All other considerations aside Constantinople will be right at the border with a likely not too friendly Turkey. How do you defend it? Yes you have example like Seoul but someone did not go and put his capital deliberately into the wolf's maws.

Sivas is the Capital, Turkey does have some remaining ports which would probably be attractive enough for jobs. Places like Eskişehir, Ankara, Kayseri and maybe Konya might have a draw if they are crossroads/hubs in road/rail infrastructure (which I am pretty sure Eskişehir already is to a degree in comparison to the relatively low amount of rail infrastructure in Turkey).

Sivas likely gets as big as Ankara TTL. Kayseri TTL has been home to the Turkish aircraft industry during the war. Post-war it may be well position to turn to the center of Turkey's high tech sector thanks to this. And I would expect quite a lot of development going towards Adana TTL.

 

[phil03]

The Soviets are not annexing Uskudar. The one big question on which truth to tell I'm undecided is whether you have a population exchange between the two halves of greater Constantinople. This being 1945 there will likely be strong voices in favor... but on the other hand this will be tantamount to saying "hey European half gets annexed to Greece"

It is your call, of course, but unfortunately, it is quite likely. I seem to recall that both on this page and elsewhere in the thread you noted that the pre-War Greek and Armenian population of Uskandar had mostly left and not returned while more and more Turks living on the European side preferred the straights. I could see the hands of those who want a population exchange being strengthened as a result, with them saying that an official population exchange would only officialize what is happening on the ground and is needed to ensure things are orderly, which is obviously a horrible take to have from a moral standpoint but as you said, this is 1945...

I also think Stalin might be willing to accept it, as for all his brutality he could be pragmatic when he needed to be and he likely has surmised that him failing to secure a significant chunk of the Old City, thanks to the Greeks having prepared themselves to beat the Soviet to the punch this around as well as the Dashnaks dominating the Armenian resistance and the Greek Communists choosing country over ideology, mean he is unlikely to be able to exert significant influence anyway. As a result, I could definitely see him just surmise that the likely counterpart to accepting the Enosis of the European side, that the WAllies would more or less officially accept that the Soviets call the shots in Uskudar for the time being, is worth it.

 

[GrimmJow007]

Steiner finally launched the counterattack:

 

[Quinkana]

Let me only point that TTL Soviet Union already has the 1914 border since 1921, what it actually tried to gain back in OTL 1946. Of course Stalin can very much go and claim Wilsonian Armenia. On the other hand this depends on balancing between securing more territory and securing territory from Turkey. The Soviets already hold everything to the east of the red line TTL. West of that line by 1945 the population is overwhelmingly Turkish. Map courtesy from Wikipedia:

We know Erzurum is under soviet control rn, and I don't think the Russians would want to have a Turkish SSR while they are right next to Turkey. I think the regions would prob be ethnically cleansed by the end.

The Soviets are not annexing Uskudar. The one big question on which truth to tell I'm undecided is whether you have a population exchange between the two halves of greater Constantinople. This being 1945 there will likely be strong voices in favor... but on the other hand this will be tantamount to saying "hey European half gets annexed to Greece"

Then why is Russia still in Cannakale and Uskudar? Especially in Cannakale where Greece surrounds the region...

An Iranian Kurdish alliance is not a given. After all what will be the largest Kurdish minority outside Kurdish control TTL?

Yeah that is true, but Kurdistan doesn't have a lot of other options in terms of allies. Turkey and the Arab nations won't ally with Kurdistan, and Iran has great relations with Azerbaijan, which has significant populations in Iran too.

Greece is a close American ally. That's anathema for Moscow...

America will also want to control Moscow's control over the Straits, and Greece will be too important to lose as an ally for America if they want to play with Black Sea politics. Therefore they need to push Greece's position.

I don't see them pushing any of Greece's more insane positions but European Constantinople that was under Greek occupation for five years may be able to get enough Greeks in the region, and I don't see America wanting Moscow to control it all (after all, an international Constantinople actually limits American ship count, and the USSR in otl used ship limits to their own advantage).

Sivas likely gets as big as Ankara TTL. Kayseri TTL has been home to the Turkish aircraft industry during the war. Post-war it may be well position to turn to the center of Turkey's high tech sector thanks to this. And I would expect quite a lot of development going towards Adana TTL.

Yeah that makes sense. Adana would be one of the few places that Turkey could build up ittl and I think it'd do somewhat well. If turkey doesn't fall into instability anyways...

 

[Lascaris]

We know Erzurum is under soviet control rn, and I don't think the Russians would want to have a Turkish SSR while they are right next to Turkey. I think the regions would prob be ethnically cleansed by the end.

Why the Soviets would not want a Soviet aligned Turkey exactly? Hell as an idea it predates the Soviet Union, as can be seen in the treaty of Hunkar Iskelesi.

Then why is Russia still in Cannakale and Uskudar? Especially in Cannakale where Greece surrounds the region...

Because Greece surrounds the region? And British control of the straits through Greece is anathema to the Soviets?

Yeah that is true, but Kurdistan doesn't have a lot of other options in terms of allies. Turkey and the Arab nations won't ally with Kurdistan, and Iran has great relations with Azerbaijan, which has significant populations in Iran too.

Are you so certain Turkey or the Arabs will remain hostile long term? And by extension Turkey will be in expansionist/revanche mode in perpetuity?

America will also want to control Moscow's control over the Straits, and Greece will be too important to lose as an ally for America if they want to play with Black Sea politics. Therefore they need to push Greece's position.

"Fuck your parliament and your constitution. America is an elephant. Cyprus is a flea. Greece is a flea. If these two fleas continue itching the elephant, they may just get whacked good... We pay a lot of good American dollars to the Greeks, Mr. Ambassador. If your Prime Minister gives me talk about democracy, parliament and constitution, he, his parliament and his constitution may not last long..."

Just to remember who is who and the attitudes involved.

 

[Whiteshore]

Yes you have example like Seoul but someone did not go and put his capital deliberately into the wolf's maws.

And on that note, Seoul is a unique case as Korea is a peninsula divided between two rival governments.

 

[Duke of Orlando]

Let me only point that TTL Soviet Union already has the 1914 border since 1921, what it actually tried to gain back in OTL 1946. Of course Stalin can very much go and claim Wilsonian Armenia. On the other hand this depends on balancing between securing more territory and securing territory from Turkey. The Soviets already hold everything to the east of the red line TTL. West of that line by 1945 the population is overwhelmingly Turkish. Map courtesy from Wikipedia:

If the Soviets already have the red line as there border than I don’t expect them to want to move the border south into the Armenian claims much since they’d start moving into land the Kurds claim which would have more cost for less gain. I do think they’d want to take Rize at the very least though, seeing as how it has significant Laz and Hemshin populations unless Turkey forced them across the border at some point. It was the majority of the old Lazistan Sanjak as well which recently destroyed by Turkey. Trabzon has similar populations it would make sense to target, plus the city itself would be of value both economically and militarily. So I could see those being targets specifically even if the Russians are going to give a lot of the rest back as a way of befriending Turkey post war.

 

[Lascaris]

Greece

Military deaths: 164,706
Civilian deaths: 535,534
Total: 700,240

Turkey

Military deaths:400,585
Civilian deaths: 164,284
Total: 564,869

Constantinople Civilian deaths by nationality

Greek: 77,990
Turkish: 36,674
Armenian: 40,064
Jewish: 51,606
Other: 3,941

Bulgaria

Military deaths: 104,102
Civilian deaths: 9,860
Total: 113,962

Yugoslavia

Royal Yugoslav Army Military deaths: 115,333
Chetnik Military deaths: 32,803
NVOJ Military deaths: 172,087
NDH Military deaths: 99,000
Civilian deaths: 620,251
Total: 1,039,474

Italy

Military deaths: 123,607

Poland

Military deaths: 17,299

Iran

Military deaths: 6,182

Soviet Union

Military deaths: 102,403

France (including Italy and North Africa)

Military deaths: 46,513

British Empire (including Italy and North Africa)

Military deaths: 101,637

USA (including Italy and North Africa)

Military deaths: 39,809

Ireland

Military deaths: 1,952

Brazil

Military deaths: 402

Germany (including Italy and North Africa)

Military deaths: 353, 395

Hungary

Military deaths: 7,606

 

[Anarch King of Dipsodes]

This many casualties by the end of 1941? 1945 (OK)
2M soldiers (1.1M Axis, 890K Allied) (1M Axis, 890K Allied, 123K Italy - on both sides).
1.5M civilians (211K Axis, 1.3M Allied)

I note Allied casualties include the Italian campaign. What about German and Italian casualties?
And Italian civilian casualties?

 

[Lascaris]

This many casualties by the end of 1941?

2M soldiers (1.1M Axis, 890K Allied).
1.5M civilians (211K Axis, 1.3M Allied)

1945

 

[Aristomenes]

IOTL Greece had about 507,000 to 807,000 total deaths out of a population of 7,220,000. ITTL deaths are also high but due to the greater population they should be less as a percentage to the total population.

 

[Sport25ing]

btw, with Spain joining the war in mid/late 1944, did Portugal also joined as well? - I know that's a bit to late to ask for that, but still...

 

[Lascaris]

• I Infantry Division
  • 4 Infantry Regiment
  • 5 Infantry Regiment
  • 54 Infantry Regiment
• II Infantry Division
  • 1 Infantry Regiment
  • 7 Infantry Regiment
  • 34 Infantry Regiment
• IV Infantry Division
  • 8 Infantry Regiment
  • 11 Infantry Regiment
  • 35 Infantry Regiment
• V Infantry Division
  • 22 Infantry Regiment
  • 23 Infantry Regiment
  • 37 Infantry Regiment
• VI Infantry Division
  • 9 Infantry Regiment
  • 29 Infantry Regiment
  • 41 Infantry Regiment
• VII Infantry Division
  • 21 Infantry Regiment
  • 43 Infantry Regiment
  • 44 Infantry Regiment
• VIII Infantry Division
  • 15 Infantry Regiment
  • 24 Infantry Regiment
  • 51 Infantry Regiment
• IX Infantry Division
  • 25 Infantry Regiment
  • 26 Infantry Regiment
  • 50 Infantry Regiment
• XI Infantry Division
  • 27 Infantry Regiment
  • 28 Infantry Regiment
  • 30 Infantry Regiment
• XII Infantry Division
  • 14 Infantry Regiment
  • 75 Infantry Regiment
  • 10 Archipelago Infantry Regiment
• XIII Mountain Division
  • 1/38 Euzone Infantry Regiment
  • 2/39 Euzone Infantry Regiment
  • 5/42 Euzone Infantry Regiment
• XVI Infantry Division
  • 31 Infantry Regiment
  • 32 Infantry Regiment
  • 33 Infantry Regiment
• Archipelago Division
  • 4 Archipelago Infantry Regiment
  • 5 Archipelago Infantry Regiment
  • 6 Archipelago Infantry Regiment
• Crete Division
  • 7 Cretan Infantry Regiment
  • 8 Cretan Infantry Regiment
  • 9 Cretan Infantry Regiment
• I Cavalry Division
  • 1 Cavalry Brigade
    • 1 Cavalry Regiment
    • 3 Cavalry Regiment
    • 5 Cavalry Regiment
  • 6 Infantry Regiment
• II Cavalry Division
  • 1 Armored Brigade
    • 1 Armored Regiment
    • 2 Armored Regiment
    • 6 Cavalry Regiment
  • 3 Infantry Regiment
• III Armored Division
  • 2 Cavalry Brigade
    • 2 Cavalry Regiment
    • 4 Cavalry Regiment
    • 7 Cavalry Regiment
  • 12 Infantry Regiment
• X Armored Division
  • 3 Cavalry Brigade
    • 8 Cavalry Regiment
    • 9 Cavalry Regiment
    • 10 Cavalry Regiment
  • 17 Infantry Regiment
• III Airborne Brigade
  • 2 Raider Regiment
  • 10 Parachute Regiment
• 13 Marine Infantry Regiment
• 3/40 Euzone Regiment
• 16 Infantry Regiment
• 18 Infantry Regiment
• 11 Archipelago Infantry Regiment
• 12 Archipelago Infantry Regiment