Probably.
The entire ATL world would be rather horrified at the dog’s breakfast that resulted from OTL’s haphazard decolonizations.
The Anglo/American - Nazi War - The on-going mystery
- Thread starter CalBear
- Start date
The entire ATL world would be rather horrified at the dog’s breakfast that resulted from OTL’s haphazard decolonizations.
Even if the A4 claims to not like imperialism, I can’t not imagine them trying to influence the world to their will. And some will see it as imperialism.
Reminds me of how the US during the early 20th Century advocated for the right of self-determination. And during the Cold War they were overthrowing governments left and right that they felt were anathema to their business interests.
I’m wondering about what’s Islam like in this timeline. I assume the conditions for Islamism’s rise are butterflied here right?
Well the A4 usually doesn't care about religion unless it's genocidal so strict wahhabism probably would be okay (as long as they tone down the bits on women's rights and accept execution for Religious reasons is not allowed). That said the house of Suad doesn't control the majority of the oil money so the money poured into it OTL won't be there.
Obviously anyone trying to start a Taliban or Al Quaeda would get a visit from special forces before they had their second meeting. An attempt to found ISIS would probably invite an immediate airstrike.
I imagine mainstream Islam is probably dominant ITTL although perhaps a little more conservative as they don't have to try and contrast with the Wahbabi's by going the other way.
I'd also imagine the Christian extremists who grew in the US from the 1980's onwards (the Waco lot for instance) were probably dealt with long before a horrific siege could happen...
Since not Cold War, the West involving lesser to Middle East and particularly not disputes over one small city midst of desert, extremist Islam has not much ways or motivation go against the West or governments of Muslim countries. And since oil is not that important, Wahhabism not get such foothold as in OTL. Furthermore without influence by Soviet Union Afghan monarchy is not ousted and such not Taliban and not much chances to existence of al-Qaeda. Probably Iran too not go as Islamist. Islamic nations anyway might are bit more conservative anyway which would help placate some conservative Muslims. Furthermore A4 wouldn't allow existence of extremist groups which allow horrible treatment of women and religious minorities and terrorist organisations would are big no. So A4 would stop al-Qaeda, Taliban and ISIS before they can do any actual damage.
I think the A4 will tolerate OTL Britain, France, the Netherlands, and Denmark having colonies or territories because those territories are just small patches of land that hold symbolic meaning (minus Denmark which has a U.S. Space Force base, Gibraltar being a sub base for the RN and allies, the Sovereign UK bases in Cyprus, and the Anglo-American base in Diego Garcia to keep the PRC, Pakistan, and Iran in check).
Brings back to how the Middle East was divided after WWI. Wahabbism and extremism didn't pop-up overnight. Depending how the A4 deals with the post-Second Global War Middle East, AQ and the Taliban won't exist. But we may have analogues to them or 1970s-80s terrorist groups. However, without Israel existing here, there will be no PLO.
They're also much smaller than the A4's French and Russian colonies.
True. A4 not bother too much at least with oversea territories of Britain, France, the Netherlands and Denmark since they don't even bother with independence or even don't want that. Like Netherlands has already years tried give independence to the Dutch Antilles but the islands just don't want that. And for example Greenland has very huge autonomy and natives have really lot of rights, probably even more than Canadian or US natives. And since many oversea territories are small islands or archipelagos, not sure would most of them even be viable as independent nations.
Even if there is some Islamic terrorist groups, they are going to be very small and very local which are handled by local armies. A4 not allow any of them grow too strong.
Taliban is extremely unlikely as they ultimately arose to power leeching from the wests support for the Mujahedeen against the Soviet occupation. Without that it's likely either the socialists win the argument at the Kabul university in the 70's and take over (the A4 are hardly going to mind traditional Afghan culture going under a bus) or nothing happens and the stable vaguely tolerant Monarchy remains in place.
Iran may still face revolution (the Shah regime hadn't been pleasant for a while) but either the A4 ignores or avoids 1951-53 (it's unlikely the government will be dumb enough to try and steal a west aligned oil company mid war) or engineer's matters so the moderates hold on in 1979.
Any totalitarian or genocidal extremist group will be met with extreme prejudice. So if any analogue of the Al-Qaeda or Taliban will form here, the A4 and their allies will respond with extreme force just like what the A4 did with Stettin.
There's too many butterflies for the Taliban or analogue to form.
I think Afghanistan would remain in the monarchy well into ATL 2024.
If I remember correctly, @CalBear mentioned in the ATL 1961-2019 follow up that the Shah of Iran was still overthrown but it was not Khomeini of OTL.
Would the A4 criticize America's failed occupation in Afghanistan on the grounds of "you don't have the guts to do what needs to be done?"
I would like to think the A4 would criticize OTL American foreign policy especially when it came to Vietnam and Afghanistan. But it would probably applaud 1991 and 2003.
A4 would criticize George H.W. Bush that he didn't invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein already in 1991. So 2003 invasion would be see as good thing on ground but A4 too would state that there was made several mistakes afterwards and USA was unable to stop rise of ISIS.
And probably Clinton's administration would get lot of dirt due Rwanda and Somalia.
The A4 would also criticize the 2011 military intervention in Libya and why NATO did not have clear plan on how to move the country forward. I think the A4 would also criticize why the Obama administration did not strike Assad forces in 2013 when it had a chance but was bluffed by Putin.
It's ironic once the A4 knows that a mere cab driver in their Libya is the dictator of our Libya.
But would it be from the standpoint of "you guys are wimps who didn't do what needed to be done?"
It reminds me of this line from Japanese live-action series The Silent Service (2024) which is based on the 1980s manga and 1995 OVA of the same name.
The admiral of the Pacific Fleet (portrayed as an evil power-hungry gung ho American that wears sunglasses which is a no-no for military uniforms) stated something in the likes of "The use of military force must end in absolute victory. We are the United States of America."
Seen at 1:44 mark
@CalBear , how does military camo patterns in the U.S. military evolve here? I'm sure there would still be USMC Frogskin since the Pacific War still happens but without the Cold War, Vietnam War, and other forms of desert wars, that would probably mean ERDL, M81 Woodland, Universal Camo Pattern, and Multicam is butterflied away. Or the very least, variations of military camo patterns still exist but would be named different from OTL.
You still have a variant of Woodland, although it is closer to what you might see duck/turkey/upland waterfowl hunters use.
What is the language policy of the parts of the UK south of the channel? I expect Snglish is available in schools, but on the whole do they have English or French as the main language of education? Any revival attempts for Flemish, Norman (even if just a French dialect by then), or Breton? And how many parts of the UK have home rule?