The Twin Vipers: A TL of the Berlin-Moscow Axis

[Ismaili777]

Privatisation, as you say, was a fairly slow process (a lot of ex-communist party members that don't want to lose their control), that's one of the big jobs the Allied occupation had to help with. Urban workers are still doing all right (they're not expected to fulfill quotas at risk of death any more, and they have a chance to partially own their businesses now)

The army wasn't technically limited (Versailles is proof enough that that doesn't really work), but a large demobilisation was "encouraged" by the Allies and the money needed to rebuild a 6M man army didn't really exist throughout the 50s. After that the cost of maintaining a really large force was such that there's no public support for it. An F-100 costs a lot more than a P-40 after all.

There's always going to be fringe groups, but Stalinists aren't ever going to get close to power again in Russia - modern Russians see Stalinism as "starve us, take God away and get in wars", three things that the population is very much opposed to. Those groups blame everyone from the Americans to the Jews for whatever they perceive to be "problems", which reduces the amount of support that they could theoretically get in tough times.

Japanese culture is very strong across much of Asia ITTL - everything within Japanese borders has by now been rebuilt into a Japanese-style look (even Vladivostok is more distinctly 'Japanese' than 'European' by 2020). A fair number of high-ranking Japanese businesses also have major presences in various countries (the Philippines, Indonesia and Vietnam chief among them), with all the cultural influence that comes along with that. Emigration out of Japan is quite minimal (it is generally frowned upon within Japan and there's not much reason to leave for most people - if they don't like the Home Islands there is always Manchuria), so most influence comes from the corporate world rather than the establishment of large Japanese communities outside Japan.

- BNC

Hmm, I just thought some may look (and yes a very few and extremists) might look to the soviet union as a time of renewed russian hegemony, great industrial power, rising education (through likbez) and military power and scientific process (notably innovation in weaponry).
In terms of Japanese influence, is Japanese architecture contain more traditional elements in this timeline without having to completely rebuild tokyo after firebombing? I assume some skyscrapers would still be built as during the 70s/80s they are necessary to keep up with a dense population, and the modernistic style I think could spread to also dense Manchuria and Korea, while Vladivostok might look more traditional due to a smaller population. I do think however the skyscrapers would be kept fairly separate from important cultural sights and traditional architecture, notably shinto temples id think.
Sorry, these are my last questions, I promise. I just find it fascinating.
This may be my favorite timeline, if not it is up there.

 

[Scerus]

As an aside was there any collaborationist regime set up in Norway by the Soviet Union?

 

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Hmm, I just thought some may look (and yes a very few and extremists) might look to the soviet union as a time of renewed russian hegemony, great industrial power, rising education (through likbez) and military power and scientific process (notably innovation in weaponry).

Some do look back fondly, but there's a lot of bad stuff that happened during that time that tends to be more easily remembered. And the Whites kept a fair chunk of the Soviet reforms that they thought were good ideas (and can be sufficiently described as 'not necessarily a communist thing').

In terms of Japanese influence, is Japanese architecture contain more traditional elements in this timeline without having to completely rebuild tokyo after firebombing? I assume some skyscrapers would still be built as during the 70s/80s they are necessary to keep up with a dense population, and the modernistic style I think could spread to also dense Manchuria and Korea, while Vladivostok might look more traditional due to a smaller population. I do think however the skyscrapers would be kept fairly separate from important cultural sights and traditional architecture, notably shinto temples id think.

That's right.

Sorry, these are my last questions, I promise. I just find it fascinating.
This may be my favorite timeline, if not it is up there.

Glad you like it

As an aside was there any collaborationist regime set up in Norway by the Soviet Union?

Not really. The Nazi puppet government was kept in, which answered to Halder... who was answering to Stalin by that point. Though the Red Army maintained a strong presence in the country.

- BNC

 

[Scerus]

Not really. The Nazi puppet government was kept in, which answered to Halder... who was answering to Stalin by that point. Though the Red Army maintained a strong presence in the country.

- BNC

Was there any attempt at communist policies like anti-religious campaigns or anything? On the orders of Stalin that is.

 

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Was there any attempt at communist policies like anti-religious campaigns or anything? On the orders of Stalin that is.

Nothing significant. By the time the Red Army was sent in (early 44), Stalin had much bigger priorities than tipping out a friendly enough government.

- BNC

 

[Scerus]

Nothing significant. By the time the Red Army was sent in (early 44), Stalin had much bigger priorities than tipping out a friendly enough government.

- BNC

So none at all then?

 

[BiteNibbleChomp]

So none at all then?

Where NKVD officers go, so do encouragements to join the local communist party. But Stalin isn't directly ordering them to do so and isn't too concerned about it.

- BNC

 

[GDIS Pathe]

Here's a quick map I whipped up based on BNC's comments and some of my own views on how the post-war world would develop

 

[BiteNibbleChomp]

@GDIS Pathe

Nice work! Manchuria should be a part of Japan rather than an independent state, but other than that I can't see any problems (Algeria staying part of France strikes me as unlikely after all the damage they suffered in WW2, but seeing as Italy holds Libya I can understand the Italians wanting to help hold the territory down on their behalf - stability is important!). Having Europe split into three blocs (London, Rome and Warsaw) is an interesting thought, and I like the idea of China forming alliances with the west Asian powers to counter Japan's influence in the east. The handling of African decolonisation is something I hadn't given a lot of thought to, but I'd say you've nailed that .

- BNC

 

[White Aurora]

The fact that the communists tried to overthrow the Republic again shortly after the Allies left doesn't help them either. The

I'm sorry, I might have missed the Post-war lore. Can you explain a bit about the Allied troop involvement in Russia post-war & The communist attempt to overthrow the Republic?

 

[Lalli]

I can't see France holding Algeria after WW2 when it was much more destructive to France. And Manchuria is part of Japan. And I am quiet sure that Bosnia would be part of Croatia. And wouldn't Albania be part of Italy? I am quiet sure that Italy invaded the country before POD and it hardly manage get independence.

 

[BiteNibbleChomp]

I'm sorry, I might have missed the Post-war lore. Can you explain a bit about the Allied troop involvement in Russia post-war & The communist attempt to overthrow the Republic?

From the last threadmark:

Even with the great amount of public support that they initially enjoyed, the Russian Republic would spend the immediate post-war period struggling with internal troubles. Remnants of the Bolsheviks and the NKVD attempted to overthrow Maklakov when Allied ground forces left Russia in 1950, and open violence would trouble Moscow for three weeks following the unsuccessful coup. Russian industry was still devastated by the war, and American aid was needed to keep the people fed for several years. Maklakov’s successors however would see the establishment of a revived national industry program, and Russia became a major agricultural exporter in the 1960s. The long-standing debate about whether a Romanov pretender should be invited to rule Russia was put to a popular vote in 1952, but the apparent success of the republican system and bad memories of Russia’s past saw the motion defeated.

Expanding on that, the Allies (except Japan) saw their main purpose in Russia as being one of ensuring the White government would be able to continue control of the state once they left - Russia is much too large to do an effective occupation of the sort seen IOTL Germany and Japan, but they can act as a police force while the Russian forces root out the worst of the communists, as well as making sure control of businesses is handed over to the public without too much violence. Also doing things like distributing food and other aid, rebuilding roads, trying war criminals and other things needed to replace Stalinism with the republic.

Rooting out all communist influence in the country is something that wouldn't be totally possible (not much beyond the Urals ever saw a single Allied soldier) until many years after the USSR's defeat, and while the NKVD had been officially disbanded in 1946 a lot of their members slipped into hiding, waiting for the Allies to leave so that they could retake power. They would eventually attempt to storm Moscow, sparking a brief civil war in Moscow and the surrounding areas. It is after this failed, and the subsequent government crackdown on anyone with a history of involvement with the Communist Party, that caused Russia to turn so dramatically against anything Red. The White government's decision to encourage religious worship again within months of taking power also helped.

And I am quiet sure that Bosnia would be part of Croatia. And wouldn't Albania be part of Italy? I am quiet sure that Italy invaded the country before POD and it hardly manage get independence.

Did I ever say anything about an independent Croatia? In my mind Yugoslavia was simply turned into Greater Serbia by the Chetniks, losing some territory to Bulgaria and Italy. The Nazi puppet certainly would have been shut down ASAP.
Albania is part of Italy.

- BNC

 

[GDIS Pathe]

I can't see France holding Algeria after WW2 when it was much more destructive to France. And Manchuria is part of Japan. And I am quiet sure that Bosnia would be part of Croatia. And wouldn't Albania be part of Italy? I am quiet sure that Italy invaded the country before POD and it hardly manage get independence.

France ITTL managed to avoid getting wholesale looted and exploited by the Reich for the better part of 4 years, avoided a massive bit of political turmoil during the Liberation and managed to avoid getting it's East Asian colonies occupied by Japan. Northeastern France is probably very messed up, but still better than getting the whole country occupied and everything that entailed. My thought processes when making this was that the French fought and won an Algerian War with some Italian help against an FLN which didn't have a superpower backing them. The Third Republic probably fell over this but, I didn't mention that anywhere so that's on me.

The Serbs got Yugoslavia back during the war I think. I had it fall apart sometime in the late 70s, early 80s once Belgrade couldn't keep it together anymore, anyways Bosnia got its independence during the same intervention which ended the Yugoslav war.

Albania is part of Italy, it does, however, have a quite lively independence movement that dominates the country.

As for Manchuria, I was thinking that someone in Tokyo looked at the number of Han they would have to assimilate, the potential for an unending insurgency and decided that, that wasn't worth it,

 

[Scerus]

I wonder what the internal politics are like in Germany, does Konrad Adenauer ever become Chancellor of this reconstituted Germany? Kurt Schumacher perhaps? The SPD was far stronger in Eastern Germany which is why he won so many elections in West Germany. Many Catholics are concentrated in the Rhineland and Bavaria and both were powerbases for Adenauer.

I'm also surprised somewhat that breaking it up was never taken more seriously - especially given France would support such proposals without the threat posed by Soviet forces. The German state has waged two wars against her - I see no reason why France would sanction her existence - same with America.

 

[BiteNibbleChomp]

I wonder what the internal politics are like in Germany, does Konrad Adenauer ever become Chancellor of this reconstituted Germany? Kurt Schumacher perhaps? The SPD was far stronger in Eastern Germany which is why he won so many elections in West Germany. Many Catholics are concentrated in the Rhineland and Bavaria and both were powerbases for Adenauer.

I'm also surprised somewhat that breaking it up was never taken more seriously - especially given France would support such proposals without the threat posed by Soviet forces. The German state has waged two wars against her - I see no reason why France would sanction her existence - same with America.

Adenauer does take power, and democratic Germany spends the next several decades taking a very centrist stance on most issues - both the right (Hitler) and the left (communists) have been discredited and Germany has borne the brunt of the damage as a result.

TBH I'm not sure if a proper breakup of Germany would have really been possible ITTL. The situation in Germany after Hitler's assassination was quite chaotic and his downfall so sudden that there wasn't really any room for the creation of multiple occupied "states". There's still the Red Army to worry about and one occupation body is easier to deal with than several when it comes to running trainloads of supplies through to the frontlines. Also the Allies didn't really have the manpower to spare setting up new governments beyond the minimum that wouldn't cause any further trouble.
The first time that the matter could be revisited is two years later once Stalin fell. And at that point the current system was working well enough that there's not a great urge to reverse course now.

- BNC

 

[sarahz]

I can't see France holding Algeria after WW2 when it was much more destructive to France. And Manchuria is part of Japan. And I am quiet sure that Bosnia would be part of Croatia. And wouldn't Albania be part of Italy? I am quiet sure that Italy invaded the country before POD and it hardly manage get independence.

I thought it was in union with the Italian crown or something rather than integrated

 

[Ismaili777]

Also on the topic of the map posted, based on what @BiteNibbleChomp has said, I don't think any Korean insurgency exists. If it has, it likely has died off by now. They wouldn't have major suppliers, and the IJA could finish them off pretty easy, much like how OTL the Soviet Union easily smashed eastern european insurgencies. Also despite the horrific crimes, Korea mostly collaborated with Japan OTL til 45, with the resistance mostly existing in exile in Manchuria, and with Japan being nicer I can't see a more excessive Korean resistance, especially as their rights improve over time. BNC already covered the Manchuria issue. Yeah even assuming Japanese remain absolute dicklords to the modern day, a Korean insurgency doesn't have much level to forment.
Also Ukraine being fascist under Bandera, a famous Polephobe, wouldn't join the intermarrium but more likely rome pact.
Edit: sorry if that came off as harsh, it just doesn't make sense for Japan to have an ongoing Korean insurgency as it is a great power in this timeline, also while Koreans aren't treated equal as BNC explained, unlike otl they actually participate in the Japanese government and even otl most resistance was in Manchuria and with that secure, the opportunity just doesn't seem to exist. I could see exiled Korean nationalist opposition, but not a ongoing insurgency, I almost see that part of your map as even more implausible given soviet insurgencies were crushed in less than a decade, despite them occurring in autonomous SSRs and republics, while Japan openly annexed Korea and Manchuria so a continuing insurgency makes even less sense (adding the HISTORICAL lack of basis in my earlier answer as well, while the UIA formed with Nazi Aid and occupation as a organizing basis, Korean nationalists as BNC stated openly allied with Japanese collaborators to fight the communists. Also many were likely co opted following Japans democratization.) Sorry, probably too harsh, but neither does Ukraine in the intermarrium make sense (bandera massacred ukrainian poles) nor a korean insurgency. I get the fact you were going for a "dying empire" vibe for Japan, but population decline is probably enough, or economic decline, an implausible insurgency doesn't make much sense, it would be a slow weakening, not collapse.
Edit: Although the "true believer" Korean nationalists who don't get bought off can join KMT because china likely hates Japan for taking Manchuria and even more for directly annexing it, so as the KMT otl harbored Korean exiles, through the post war of this world, it can be more excessive.

Korean independence movement - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

For sourcing on the state of the Korean resistance in OTL. Most resistance in Korea died in the 20s and in this timeline, it will die further as Japan gets nicer to Koreans and allow them and Manchurians (who evolve their own identity further in this timeline) into the Empire. Likely Japanese nationalism will further emphasis the "brother races" between the three. Sorry, I don't see any basis for a Korean insurgency. Although perhaps in the 70s and 80s something akin to "the troubles" can occur, I don't think it will last, and I do not think they can have any territory.

 

[Ismaili777]

I feel like the Soviet army will use the MG 42 or their own version derived from that given the intense co operation between the states and in honesty the MG 42 was indeed probably one of the best weapon of the Germans. If they co operate in tanks, it make sense that they co operate in guns and MG42 designs end up in soviet use.
Also, I could see them jointly developing a assault rifle somewhere in between an STG 44 and an AK47, probably seeing great soviet use in the last year of the war.

 

[GDIS Pathe]

the Soviet Union easily smashed eastern european insurgencies

Considering that the UIA managed to remain active well into the 50s I don't think easily is a particularly good term here.

Also despite the horrific crimes, Korea mostly collaborated with Japan OTL til 45, with the resistance mostly existing in exile in Manchuria, and with Japan being nicer I can't see a more excessive Korean resistance, especially as their rights improve over time. BNC already covered the Manchuria issue. Yeah even assuming Japanese remain absolute dicklords to the modern day, a Korean insurgency doesn't have much level to forment.

Its the equivalent of the Irish troubles nothing existential but both annoying and very well funded by the RoC, it's been on-off for the past 50 years give or take.

Also Ukraine being fascist under Bandera, a famous Polephobe, wouldn't join the intermarrium but more likely rome pact.

Yeah, until Bandera died and was replaced with someone more willing to look to Warsaw in place of Rome.

autonomous SSRs

Ha, that would be the day when Moscow says jump the SSRs ask how high

Japan openly annexed Korea and Manchuria so a continuing insurgency makes even less sense

Japan annexing Manchuria(which isn't something that I see whatever reformist Japanese government doing) wouldn't make the problem better it just means that the problem would get worse considering the fact that they would need to keep order in that too.

Yeah even assuming Japanese remain absolute dicklords to the modern day, a Korean insurgency doesn't have much level to forment.

Considering that the Japanese right win and military would still retain considerable influence on top of the fact that OTL's Japanese actions in the region didn't do much to encourage loyalty plus a wealth of Korean exiles and a powerful neighbour willing to piss of Tokyo. Japanese reformers may be willing to rein things in but they still need to tread lightly on top of the fact that it's not like Japanese rule in the region was particularly pleasant even during the Taisho era

I get the fact you were going for a "dying empire" vibe for Japan, but population decline is probably enough, or economic decline, an implausible insurgency doesn't make much sense, it would be a slow weakening, not collapse.

I was going for the declining empire vibe considering OTL's trouble with stagflation and China literally being right there. Considering that said Korean insurgency and I'll repeat myself again isn't particularly more than an annoyance. Also were in the wrold did you get the impression japan was "collapsing"?

 

[Ismaili777]

Snip

"Considering that the UIA managed to remain active well into the 50s I don't think easily is a particularly good term here."
Both the Polish and Ukrainian insurgencies theoretically continued into the 50s, but slowly faded into irrevelence, which is what I am eluding to when you make the map showing dots of territorial control.

"Its the equivalent of the Irish troubles nothing existential but both annoying and very well funded by the RoC, it's been on-off for the past 50 years give or take."
China can't just fund an insurgency and not expect any retaliation. Japan likely has nuclear capability in this timeline, while China will likely get nuclear weapons considerably more late, China has Mongols, Uighurs and Tibetans that will want to leave, Japan could fund them in retaliation, and in this timeline, it is safe to say Mongols, Uighurs and Tibetans have more reason to leave ROC than reformist Japan (the ROC has a HORRIBLE record regarding minorities, in fact, one of their major criticisms of Mao was allowing an independent Mongolia under Russian influence, even TODAY in Democratic Tawain they haven't changed their mind on Tibet or Xinjiang.)


"Yeah, until Bandera died and was replaced with someone more willing to look to Warsaw in place of Rome."
Except the Poles wouldn't forgive them or accept them, even if it gave Poland an advantage, it is likely they dislike Ukraine more than Russia in all honesty, if not close to that.

"Japan annexing Manchuria(which isn't something that I see whatever reformist Japanese government doing) wouldn't make the problem better it just means that the problem would get worse considering the fact that they would need to keep order in that too."
Except the author confirmed Manchuria gets annexed by Japan. And Manchuria has its own separate identity by the modern day, so China may want it back, but the Manchurians will not want to go to China, and will fight for Japan to prevent that.

"Considering that the Japanese right win and military would still retain considerable influence on top of the fact that OTL's Japanese actions in the region didn't do much to encourage loyalty plus a wealth of Korean exiles and a powerful neighbour willing to piss of Tokyo. Japanese reformers may be willing to rein things in but they still need to tread lightly on top of the fact that it's not like Japanese rule in the region was particularly pleasant even during the Taisho era"
Except Japanese rule in this timeline gets more pleasant than the Taisho era. It is eluded to while Korea and Manchuria aren't equal to Japan, as @BiteNibbleChomp openly stated it was akin to the other German states in the Kaiserreich. Yes, the Prussians/Japanese dominate, but they don't really occupy. Also, they don't really need to treat lightly as the militarists essentially got disgraced with many committing seppuku when the soviets overran Manchuria and much of Korea. They still exist, but are likely fringe, especially given they were militarily disgraced. Manchuria retains its nobility, as does Korea in this, except with civilian rule, they are no longer merely to show or pay lip service of equality in korea, but actually integrated by now. None of what I have said keep in mind, is not what the author hasn't said. The Kaiserreich imperial analogue was one said by BNC himself. Yes, they are not equal, but they are pretty fully integrated Again, essentially akin to Prussian monopoly over the Kaiserreich. After that, is is likely most in Japan proper hate them.

"I was going for the declining empire vibe considering OTL's trouble with stagflation and China literally being right there. Considering that said Korean insurgency and I'll repeat myself again isn't particularly more than an annoyance. Also were in the wrold did you get the impression japan was "collapsing"?"
The dots indicate territorial control, thus slipping out the grip of Japan, not a mere annoyance. Hence your last question. Also, China is right there, and is pissed about Manchuria in all likelyhood, but by the present day Manchuria, much like OTL Hong Kong and increasingly today Taiwan as well, has crafted an entirely seperate identity. As I covered below, Japan and throw back MUCH stronger punches, and China won't want to aggravate them. They will be angry and bad mouth, but starting any insurgency (which cannot remain undetected) will result in a much worse consequence from Japan in all honesty.