The development of Central Asia without Russian colonialism

CaliGuy

Banned
How would Central Asia have developed over the last 200 years had Russia, for whatever reason, avoided conquering and colonizing it?

For instance, would we see much less ethnic nationalism in Central Asia in this TL?
 

PhilippeO

Banned
isn't Afghanistan fate good example for CE without Russia : weak monarchy, strong local autonomy, tribe that ignore border, Westernization in big cities, etc
 
One question is, if Russia doesn`t conquer it, does anyone else?
Might be that a Khanate stays around. The Chinese are unlikely to go into the area though, and the Persians might find the deserts of Turks to be useless to themselves. Maybe the Persians stay around Turkemenistan and the Afghans get the Tajiks and those nearby? A lot of Muslim states of old went over various ethnic groups, but holding together Central Asia could be tricky.
 
Might be that a Khanate stays around. The Chinese are unlikely to go into the area though, and the Persians might find the deserts of Turks to be useless to themselves. Maybe the Persians stay around Turkemenistan and the Afghans get the Tajiks and those nearby? A lot of Muslim states of old went over various ethnic groups, but holding together Central Asia could be tricky.
Maybe. I wonder, though, if the British aren`t going to try something.
 

Skallagrim

Banned
Lots of Turkic khanates great and small. The Kazakh Khanate (existed 1465–1847 in OTL) is probably sticking around, basically covering the area west of China, between what is Russia and Iran/Afghanistan in the OTL present day. If China's territorial development goes roughly the same way, China's border will be further west, up to Lake Balkhash-- without Russia to push at China's borders, China will likely maintain such a border. (Yet attempts to push yet further west seem unlikely.)

North of the Kazakh Khanate, we have an area of more loosely affiliated, tribal lands, and then the Khanate of Sibir (existed in OTL from 1490 until conquered by the Russians in 1598). Yet further north, Samoyedic peoples live, mostly in tribal constellations. To their east, the same goes for the Yakuts, the Chukchi and various other peoples of the (OTL) Russian far north-east.

South of that area, east of Sibir and north of Mongolia, find we groups of Mongolic peoples, such as the Daurs. And further east, of course, the bulk of the Tungusic peoples, such as the Jurchen. These areas, those inhabited by Mongolic and Tungusic peoples, are ones that I find likely areas of expansion for China. Especially the region we'd call Manchuria (at its greatest extent, including the areas Russia annexed in OTL), would be of interest to China, and were indeed for a time under China's control in OTL. I see that lasting, without Russian involvement.

Regarding British ambitions in central Asia and north-east Asia: one must understand these were intended to thwart Russia. Without a Russian threat, even an attempt to take Afghanistan might be discarded by Britain, let alone vague OTL plans to gain a foothold in Manchuria. British (and other European) ambitions in the far east are far more likely to be aimed at that much wealthier prize: China itself.

So, that leaves us with a pretty clear picture of what the area would most likely end up looking like.
 
Maybe. I wonder, though, if the British aren`t going to try something.
Rather out of the way. The area used to be important when it was used for moving things between China and the markets of European and Islamic states. Sea trade made it rather less important. Not sure what the British would want up there, though I suppose they might support people for the heck of it. Most likely to just form a large buffer zone from the Russians. Suppose there might also be more Chinese influence in the area, and some Emperors or generals later on might think about bringing it in closer, though that is a long shot.
 
As others pointed out, the Qing Dynasty nominally claimed everything up to Lake Balkhash, which includes today's Almaty, most of Kyrgyzstan (including Bishkek), and the entire eastern half of Tajikistan (Gorno-Badakshan Autonomous Oblast). This historic region is sometimes referred to as the “Outer Northwest” (外西北, Wai Xibei). In practice, the Qing exercised very little control over the area, with no major settlements to enforce their claims, which is why it was so easy for the Russians to take it.

It's possible that the Kazakhs might still establish a state that dominates the northern parts of Central Asia, possibly including the Karakalpak regions of Uzbekistan and whatever's left of Kyrgyzstan in lieu of the Almaty area.

There will probably also be a major state in the south, probably based on Bukhara but perhaps in Khiva, Kokand, or Samarkand, with the Uzbeks and Tajiks under its thumb.

It's also possible that whatever state dominates the southern part might also win over the Kazakh regions to the north, forming a large Central Asian state that pushes against Afghanistan and China.
 
How does a non-Russia vacuum filled by Turkic khanates, thereby butterflying away the Great Game between Russia and Britain affect Tibet, Afghanistan, Persia, and European politics in general? The Great Game, emphasized by Afghanistan, influenced a lot of late 19th and early 20th century geopolitics. Does it mean the Great Game is still played, but with Persia and the Ottoman Empire more important? Does this mean Persia is perhaps actually dismantled and the old man of the OE is divided up early in spheres? Is Britain MORE aggressive in Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan, and Tibet? As we enter the 1950s does the PRC recognize the khanates or treats them as they treated Tibet and not recognize their independence and simply invades illegally. Does Iran see this area as natural "little sisters" because this was once Iranian populated areas, is Turkey no longer as in OTL the leader of pan-Turkicism if there are independent khanates. How does this effect the Uigurs? Do they maintain their independence or does the PRC crush them as they did OTL?
 

Skallagrim

Banned
How does a non-Russia vacuum filled by Turkic khanates, thereby butterflying away the Great Game between Russia and Britain affect Tibet, Afghanistan, Persia, and European politics in general? The Great Game, emphasized by Afghanistan, influenced a lot of late 19th and early 20th century geopolitics. Does it mean the Great Game is still played, but with Persia and the Ottoman Empire more important? Does this mean Persia is perhaps actually dismantled and the old man of the OE is divided up early in spheres? Is Britain MORE aggressive in Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan, and Tibet? As we enter the 1950s does the PRC recognize the khanates or treats them as they treated Tibet and not recognize their independence and simply invades illegally. Does Iran see this area as natural "little sisters" because this was once Iranian populated areas, is Turkey no longer as in OTL the leader of pan-Turkicism if there are independent khanates. How does this effect the Uigurs? Do they maintain their independence or does the PRC crush them as they did OTL?

There's not going to be a PRC with a pre-1600 POD. Yet other points you raise are very relevant. Some thoughts:

-- Britain will, assuming no unexpected bufferflies, still succeed in India, besting France. We may tentatively assume that this happens in roughly the same timeframe.

-- Less of a Russian threat may lead Britain to be more open to the earlier dismantling of the Ottoman Empire-- although if France-British rivalry is a factor, then Britain may want to prop up the Ottomans anyway (just to prevent France from being the main recipient of former Ottoman lands).

-- On the other hand, dismantling Persia is hardly interesting until (and unless) Britain becomes interesting in putting a railroad through southern Persia. Without Russia as a rival in the region, Persia is just not very interesting. If anything, should the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire happen, it may well be an Anglo-Russo-Persian group effort (maybe with austria working alongside them), all to exclude France from the spoils.

-- For the same reasons, extra British aggression in Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan, and Tibet seems unlikely. More likely that they'll spend extra available energy on areas that are more profitable. I say again: Chinese concessions.

-- The Central Asian khanate(s) would no doubt be too far away from China's power base to be controlled, just as @pa_dutch points out. If anything, the possibility that one big khanate (khaganate?) arises in the region could see things go the other way: that khaganate could conquer the Uyghur regions with only moderate trouble, and China would not be able to regain effective control of the area. Certainly not if Britain (and/or othher opportunistic European powers) are nibbling away at China in the east...
 
Last edited:
How would Central Asia have developed over the last 200 years had Russia, for whatever reason, avoided conquering and colonizing it?

For instance, would we see much less ethnic nationalism in Central Asia in this TL?
How are we preventing Russian expansion into Central Asia? A Russia screw or Russia just looking elsewhere? If it's the latter then the status quo probably continues undisturbed, as its within Russia's interest to have a stable and non-threatening southern flank, the Khanates likely still become part of Russia's "Sphere of Influence". If it's the former then it's really hard to place as you're not only trying to fill the void left by Russian expansion, but you're trying to fill the void left by Russia in general.
 

Skallagrim

Banned
How are we preventing Russian expansion into Central Asia? A Russia screw or Russia just looking elsewhere? If it's the latter then the status quo probably continues undisturbed, as its within Russia's interest to have a stable and non-threatening southern flank, the Khanates likely still become part of Russia's "Sphere of Influence". If it's the former then it's really hard to place as you're not only trying to fill the void left by Russian expansion, but you're trying to fill the void left by Russia in general.

Russia can just be united, but considerably weaker. For instance, a scenario where the aristocracy seizes power at the expense of the Tsar, resulting in a situation like the one ultimately facing Poland: aristicrats with inalienable rights to block any decision they dislike, thus creating horrid gridlock.
 
What if Russia does move into the region but allows the region to remain much more autonomous than in OTL.

What if they let the Persians keep Ashgabat and OTL Turkmenistan?

Could this lead to a Iranian cultural revival in Central Asia instead of the Turkization that happened in OTL?
 
There's not going to be a PRC with a pre-1600 POD. Yet other points you raise are very relevant. Some thoughts:

-- Britain will, assuming no unexpected bufferflies, still succeed in India, besting France. We may tentatively assume that this happens in roughly the same timeframe.

-- Less of a Russian threat may lead Britain to be more open to the earlier dismantling of the Ottoman Empire-- although if France-Beritish rivalry is a factor, then Britain may want to prop up the Ottomans anyway (just to prevent France from being the main recepient of former Ottoman lands).

-- On the other hand, dismantling Persia is hardly interesting until (and unless) Britain becomes interesting in putting a railroad through southern Persia. Without Russia as a rival in the region, Persia is just not very interesting. If anything, should the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire happen, it may well be an Anglo-Russo-Persian group effort (maybe with austria working alongside them), all to exclude France from the spoils.

-- For the same reasons, extra British aggression in Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan, and Tibet seems unlikely. More likely that they'll spend extra available energy on areas that are more profitable. I say again: Chinese concessions.

-- The Central Asian khanate(s) would no doubt be too far away from China's power base to be controlled, just as @pa_dutch points out. If anything, the possibility that one big khanate (khaganate?) arises in the region could see things go the other way: that khaganate could conquer the Uyghur regions with only moderate trouble, and China would not be able to regain effective control of the area. Certainly not if Britain (and/or othher opportunistic European powers) are nibbling away at China in the east...
I agree with everything except that a pre-1600 POD means no PRC, you have to show cause and effect. Russia, I am assuming, still has Siberia, Tannu Tavu, and goes on to have Vladivostok and Alaska. Which means the Russo-Japanese War still happen. WWI will still happen, the communists form the Soviet Union; WWII will still happen and China will have their civil war. No Central Asia for Russia doesn't mean squat for any of that history. "Butterflies" isn't a reason, have to show POD change causes A causes B causes C, or else C is as OTL.
 

Skallagrim

Banned
I agree with everything except that a pre-1600 POD means no PRC, you have to show cause and effect. Russia, I am assuming, still has Siberia, Tannu Tavu, and goes on to have Vladivostok and Alaska. Which means the Russo-Japanese War still happen. WWI will still happen, the communists form the Soviet Union; WWII will still happen and China will have their civil war. No Central Asia for Russia doesn't mean squat for any of that history. "Butterflies" isn't a reason, have to show POD change causes A causes B causes C, or else C is as OTL.

You may use a line of visible causal relations, if you wish. I too believe in pure causality, but then, unimportant Russian soldier Ivan not dying in Siberian warfare in 1590 means he comes back home to his wife, who in OTL was widowed and married Casimir two years later. She has a son with Ivan here, who never existed in OTL, while the two OTL daughters she had with Casimir never exist. There are hundreds of alt-living and alt-dead people, whose very existence will alter the world around them in millions of ways each day. (Not to mention that Casimir marries Olga from two villages over in this TL, which changes the life of Pjotr, who married her in OTL... etc.) The ripples are myriad. They are endless. A few generations later, thousands upon thousands of completely different ATL people are alive, while countless OTL people don't exist. They do different things, write different books that inspire different people on the other side of the globe...

No. There will not be a PRC. Events may take the same shape due to peristing historical forces, natural geopolitical interests, cultural trends... but by the twentieth century, with a 1580 POD or so - no matter which POD - there will hardly be a single person in existence who lived at that point in OTL. You'd have to go to distant tribes that went uncontacted to find such a person. All because of cause and effect. No spooky action at a distance, no randomness. Just one thing leading to other things, and each of them doing the same, on and on and on.


Anyway, that's for cause and effect. Regarding Siberia, I'm of the opinion that Siberia is part of Central Asia. Just the northern part of it. That's why I mentioned it, and regions to its east, in my initial post here. I'm reading the scenario here as "Russia stays roughly west of the Ural Mountains".
 
Last edited:
How are we preventing Russian expansion into Central Asia? A Russia screw or Russia just looking elsewhere? If it's the latter then the status quo probably continues undisturbed, as its within Russia's interest to have a stable and non-threatening southern flank, the Khanates likely still become part of Russia's "Sphere of Influence". If it's the former then it's really hard to place as you're not only trying to fill the void left by Russian expansion, but you're trying to fill the void left by Russia in general.

Majormost issue with any such scenario yes. Once there is nothing blocking the Volga bend (so no Kazan/Volga Bulgaria/Golden Horde), there is nothing blocking *Russia from reaching the Pacific, other than maybe a powerful state based around the Amur (an alt-Qing allied with Korea?). Either way there is nothing to block *Russia from reaching the Baikal.

And of course unlike today there is no real border between Siberia and Kazakhstan (or Mongolia, or Kyrgyzstan, or Xinjiang/Turkestan; the only real border is the desert that separates the Aral outflow from the Ural basin. *Russia will overcome it as it did OTL: by boat). The fertile areas are all flat lowlands (like the Barabinsk steppe or the Ishim basin) and they will always create conflict between any settling power and any steppe-based khanate.

So chances are we're keeping *Russia out by denying them the lower Volga/Ural altogether. In that case whoever holds those areas may find a power equilibrium with a state based in *Uzbekistan or something, neither being strong enough to outright overcome the other. Which probably means you need a relatively united Central Asia, to prevent being overrun by Persia/Afghanistan/*Volga-Ural
 
You may use a line of visible causal relations, if you wish. I too believe in pure causality, but then, unimportant Russian soldier Ivan not dying in Siberian warfare in 1590 means he comes back home to his wife, who in OTL was widowed and married Casimir two years later. She has a son with Ivan here, who never existed in OTL, while the two OTL daughters she had with Casimir never exist. There are hundreds of alt-living and alt-dead people, whose very existence will alter the world around them in millions of ways each day. (Not to mention that Casimir marries Olga from two villages over in this TL, which changes the life of Pjotr, who married hert in OTL... etc.) The ripples are myriad. They are endless. A few generations later, thousands upon thousands of completely different ATL people are alive, while countless OTL people don't exist. They do different things, write different books that inspire different people on the other side of the globe...

No. There will not be a PRC. Events may take the same shape due to peristing historical forces, natural geopolitical interests, cultural trends... but by the twentieth century, with a 1580 POD or so - no matter which POD - there will hardly be a single person in existence who lived at that point in OTL. You'd have to go to distant tribes that went uncontacted to find such a person. All because of cause and effect. No spooky action at a distance, no randomness. Just one thing leading to other things, and each of them doing the same, on and on and on.


Anyway, that's for cause and effect. Regarding Siberia, I'm of the opinion that Siberia is part of Central Asia. Just the northern part of it. That's why I mentioned it, and regions to its east, in my initial post here. I'm reading the scenario here as "Russia stays roughly west of the Ural Mountains".
Eh, your scenario begins with hundreds of ripples, but they are outweighed by hundreds of millions of people who are the same and have no contact at all with your ripples, and whose billion descendants are still untouched by your thousands upon thousands, and by the time your ripples reach a million, there are SEVERAL billion people untouched by your million. Unless one of those ripples outdoes a "great man" history event, you're never going to make the ocean see your couple of stones that were thrown effect the tide caused by the moon which is still the same.
 
Anyway, that's for cause and effect. Regarding Siberia, I'm of the opinion that Siberia is part of Central Asia. Just the northern part of it. That's why I mentioned it, and regions to its east, in my initial post here. I'm reading the scenario here as "Russia stays roughly west of the Ural Mountains".

I always envisioned Siberia as North Asia, rather than Central Asia.
 

Skallagrim

Banned
Eh, your scenario begins with hundreds of ripples, but they are outweighed by hundreds of millions of people who are the same and have no contact at all with your ripples, and whose billion descendants are still untouched by your thousands upon thousands, and by the time your ripples reach a million, there are SEVERAL billion people untouched by your million. Unless one of those ripples outdoes a "great man" history event, you're never going to make the ocean see your couple of stones that were thrown effect the tide caused by the moon which is still the same.

I think you'll find that people's lives intersect, and that 'lines of causality' are not somehow magically separate from one another. In other words: changes accumulate hyperbolically. Not that it matters that much to me: if you want to have the PRC in a scenario with an 1580 POD, go for it. It just won't be happening in any world I envision. And as I said, I'm assuming a scenario where Russia never makes it past the Urals, so that should provide enough evident causal changes even for your liking.

On that note...

I always envisioned Siberia as North Asia, rather than Central Asia.

I imagine a middle must have a north. If we have a Western Asia, and an East Asia, and if the Russian Far East is considered part of East Asia, being the Far East and all...then surely the bit between Western Russia and the Russian Far East must belong to Central Asia?

Eh, it makes sense to me. ;)
 
I agree with everything except that a pre-1600 POD means no PRC, you have to show cause and effect. Russia, I am assuming, still has Siberia, Tannu Tavu, and goes on to have Vladivostok and Alaska. Which means the Russo-Japanese War still happen.
No Russian expansion into Central Asia = Britain not singling Russia out as its primary threat = Britain not helping modernize the Japanese Navy as it has no use for a check on Russia = no Russo-Japanese War/Russian Victory in the Russo-Japanese War. Everything after is too different for things to return to OTL's path.
 
Last edited:
Top