Turtledove's 'Worldwar': Specific terms of the Peace of Cairo

[TR1]

1) All the Dominions were technically independent countries, they were merely also member states of the British Commonwealth; enjoyed unofficial military alliance with the UK and each other; and acknowledge the British monarch as Head of State. So it would be possible for Ireland to truthfully be regarded as an independent country while still having ties to Britain.

Oh, I see. In Colonization, it was definitely an independent country.

2) The map I made was how I envisaged the world just a month or two after the Peace of Cairo (giving the powers enough time to occupy the remnants of other countries). Newfoundland was not ceded to Canada until 1949 IOTL, so Britain would realistically still hold sovereignty over Newfoundland at this time (1944). Also, I'm afraid I lack the Colonisation series - was it explicitly stated that Newfoundland was part of Canada, or is the (probably inaccurate) map the source?

Explicitly stated in DtE.

 

[Ilúphatar]

Oh, I see. In Colonization, it was definitely an independent country.



Explicitly stated in DtE.

I wonder in what sense 'independent' meant.

I see. Perhaps the transfer occurred at the same time as it did IOTL. Still, I doubt the British would have simply turned Newfoundland over the minute the war ended, so I reckon it's acceptable to show it as British in the map.

 

[The Gunslinger]

1) All the Dominions were technically independent countries, they were merely also member states of the British Commonwealth; enjoyed unofficial military alliance with the UK and each other; and acknowledge the British monarch as Head of State. So it would be possible for Ireland to truthfully be regarded as an independent country while still having ties to Britain.

2) The map I made was how I envisaged the world just a month or two after the Peace of Cairo (giving the powers enough time to occupy the remnants of other countries). Newfoundland was not ceded to Canada until 1949 IOTL, so Britain would realistically still hold sovereignty over Newfoundland at this time (1944). Also, I'm afraid I lack the Colonisation series - was it explicitly stated that Newfoundland was part of Canada, or is the (probably inaccurate) map the source?

Newfoundland gets hurled into Canada during the peace of Cairo in the books.

I really can't see the Race letting Britain keep Ceylon though, the British had no heavy equipment there and it directly threatens the Race holdings on three separate continents.

 

[Ilúphatar]

Newfoundland gets hurled into Canada during the peace of Cairo in the books.

I really can't see the Race letting Britain keep Ceylon though, the British had no heavy equipment there and it directly threatens the Race holdings on three separate continents.

I recently read the parts of Striking the Balance which addresses the negotiations at the Peace of Cairo. There was no mention of Newfoundland at all. Was the Canadian acquisition of Newfoundland specifically stated to have been a result of the Peace of Cairo in Colonisation?

We have to remember that the Race failed to comprehend the strategic value of some islands, evidenced in their severe underestimation of the 'Britainish' and the 'Nipponese' during their invasion. It's possible that Ceylon remained British given that factor. However, it is also certainly possible that Ceylon was, as you say, ceded to the Race. We're all just speculating, after all.

In a completely different vein - why didn't the British reap any reward from the Manhattan Project in Worldwar? The Project was, after all, a joint American-British-Canadian effort. Why did Britain have to rely on Nazi Germany for help in its development, especially considering that British physicists were rather closer to achieving 'tube alloys' than the Germans were? What would have been the consequences for Britain had they been given/produced a nuclear weapon and used it against the Race? Could they regain parts of their Empire?

 

[Faeelin]

In a completely different vein - why didn't the British reap any reward from the Manhattan Project in Worldwar? The Project was, after all, a joint American-British-Canadian effort. Why did Britain have to rely on Nazi Germany for help in its development, especially considering that British physicists were rather closer to achieving 'tube alloys' than the Germans were? What would have been the consequences for Britain had they been given/produced a nuclear weapon and used it against the Race? Could they regain parts of their Empire?

Churchill threatened this, but as Molotov (and Atvar) recognized, there was no way the British Empire could fight a globe-spanning war against the Race.

People keep thinking this was a peace of equals. It was not. The race was worried it would exhaust itself finishing off the Human powers, but it still had a commanding advantage.

 

[Alexander North]

To answer every question people have had about the Race not taking over any islands: The Race's homeworld was mostly land with a few small lakes here and there. They didn't understand the strategic importance of islands because they didn't have any islands on Home. As such, they left the islands alone because they figured they weren't all that important, having no precedent to work from and preferring to seize the main continental masses.

 

[Ilúphatar]

Churchill threatened this, but as Molotov (and Atvar) recognized, there was no way the British Empire could fight a globe-spanning war against the Race.

Equipped with nuclear weapons, it probably could have. The Soviets, Germans and Americans got the Race to withdraw from all of 'their' territories because of the threat of their use. Why couldn't the British regain some of their colonies if in a similar position, and not merely an 'observer' along with the Japanese?

Also, when did Churchill threaten that? I'd be interested to know. I don't remember any such declarations from Churchill other than the one where he warned the Race about Britain's chemical weapons (without revealing the exact nature of the weapons).

For that manner, what could the Japanese have gained at the Peace of Cairo had they obtained the bomb?

 

[Clandango]

As previously stated, the map has problems. Italy is one of those problems: In Second Contact, Italy is specified as an independent, albeit a vassal of Germany. They even have an embassy in Little Rock. So the map is wrong.

Really? I had originally thought it was wrong before reading further into the book or remembe wring how Hitler said at the end of one of the books how they were annexing Italy 'despite his friendship with Mussolini'. Rome had been vaporized at this time, so the capital would be moving northward again.

 

[bguy]

Equipped with nuclear weapons, it probably could have. The Soviets, Germans and Americans got the Race to withdraw from all of 'their' territories because of the threat of their use. Why couldn't the British regain some of their colonies if in a similar position, and not merely an 'observer' along with the Japanese?

The United States and Soviet Union are both huge countries with fairly dispersed populations, so they can afford to play nuclear punch for punch with the Race for a long time and Atvar knows that. Britain though is a much smaller and more densely populated country, so it simply can't afford to take that many nuke hits before it is turned into a radioactive wasteland, and Atvar would know that as well. As such even if the British develop nukes and the means to deliver them to Race territory, they still have much less leverage than the U.S., the Soviets or even the Germans to force concessions from the Race.

Also at the peace conference Atvar flat out said that Nazi controlled territory was small enough that the Race could probably safely glass it without contaminating the rest of the planet. If Atvar is at the point where he is seriously considering glassing Nazi territory, he would probably be willing to do the same to British territory (which is even smaller than Nazi territory) if the British set off a nuke anywhere. (And yes its possible Atvar is bluffing, but given that Churchill can already walk away from the conference with the independence of his own country and Canada assured, it would be crazy for him to risk nuclear annihilation just to try and hold on to a little bit of the empire.)

For that manner, what could the Japanese have gained at the Peace of Cairo had they obtained the bomb?

Japan has basically the same problem as the British. It just isn't big enough to be able to credibly trade nuke hits with the Race. (And especially since unlike Britain Japan has already had its richest, largest city nuked.)

 

[TR1]

Really? I had originally thought it was wrong before reading further into the book or remembe wring how Hitler said at the end of one of the books how they were annexing Italy 'despite his friendship with Mussolini'. Rome had been vaporized at this time, so the capital would be moving northward again.

From Striking the Balance, von Ribbentrop says, "The Fuhrer insists on the full restoration of all territory under the benevolent dominion of the Reich and its allied states, including Italy, at the time of [the Race's] arrival..." So, no, Italy was supposed to be restored to nominal independence.

 

[Ilúphatar]

The United States and Soviet Union are both huge countries with fairly dispersed populations, so they can afford to play nuclear punch for punch with the Race for a long time and Atvar knows that. Britain though is a much smaller and more densely populated country, so it simply can't afford to take that many nuke hits before it is turned into a radioactive wasteland, and Atvar would know that as well. As such even if the British develop nukes and the means to deliver them to Race territory, they still have much less leverage than the U.S., the Soviets or even the Germans to force concessions from the Race.

Also at the peace conference Atvar flat out said that Nazi controlled territory was small enough that the Race could probably safely glass it without contaminating the rest of the planet. If Atvar is at the point where he is seriously considering glassing Nazi territory, he would probably be willing to do the same to British territory (which is even smaller than Nazi territory) if the British set off a nuke anywhere. (And yes its possible Atvar is bluffing, but given that Churchill can already walk away from the conference with the independence of his own country and Canada assured, it would be crazy for him to risk nuclear annihilation just to try and hold on to a little bit of the empire.)

Atvar was almost definitely bluffing, considering how reluctantly nukes had been used. Not to mention that the Race did not possess a limitless supply of nuclear weapons, and almost certainly not enough to destroy an entire continent.

I would also argue, however, that Germany is as vulnerable as Britian and Japan, as most of 'its' territory is composed of puppet states that would quickly revolt if the German heartland were destroyed (which is one reason why I find it difficult to understand how Germany retained its sphere of influence after the Race-German War - Britain and Finland slipped the net, to be sure, but perhaps the threat of nuclear retaliation a la Bucharest might have kept the rest in line).

However, I agree that Britain and Japan were much more vulnerable to nuclear attack than the other human powers. But I cannot believe that a British nuclear arsenal (and thus full diplomatic recognition) would not result in the retention of some overseas territory - South Africa, perhaps, or a part of India. Still, the UK got a pretty good deal at Cairo, all things considered.

With regards to a Japanese nuke, I can't see them passing up the opportunity to get Korea back.

 

[bguy]

Atvar was almost definitely bluffing, considering how reluctantly nukes had been used. Not to mention that the Race did not possess a limitless supply of nuclear weapons, and almost certainly not enough to destroy an entire continent.

Well the Race wouldn't have to blast the whole continent as they already controlled Poland, Italy, Spain, and a good chunk of France and presumably they wouldn't be nuking British or Soviet territory if their goal was just to smash the Nazis flat.

I would also argue, however, that Germany is as vulnerable as Britian and Japan, as most of 'its' territory is composed of puppet states that would quickly revolt if the German heartland were destroyed (which is one reason why I find it difficult to understand how Germany retained its sphere of influence after the Race-German War - Britain and Finland slipped the net, to be sure, but perhaps the threat of nuclear retaliation a la Bucharest might have kept the rest in line).

I agree with you that realistically the Nazis are just as vulnerable as Britain and Japan. The difference is Hitler is deranged enough to think that Germany can win a sustained city for city nuclear exchange with the Race. Churchill isn't nearly that crazy (and even if he was Parliament would never stand for sacrificing London just to try and get Australia or Singapore back), so he has much less leverage for engaging in nuclear brinksmanship.

However, I agree that Britain and Japan were much more vulnerable to nuclear attack than the other human powers. But I cannot believe that a British nuclear arsenal (and thus full diplomatic recognition) would not result in the retention of some overseas territory - South Africa, perhaps, or a part of India. Still, the UK got a pretty good deal at Cairo, all things considered.

India is pretty much impossible for Britain to retain by this point even if the Race was willing to give it up. After all Britain couldn't hold on to India IOTL, and the British are in much worse shape in WorldWar. (The British Isles were directly invaded, so it probably took a lot more damage than it did IOTL, it hasn't gotten any meaningful Lend Lease since 1942, and it won't be getting any Marshall Plan aid since the U.S. is going to be needing all its resources to rebuild itself.)

South Africa could be possible to retain but again would Churchill be willing to risk London, Birmingham and Manchester for the chance of holding onto South Africa?

With regards to a Japanese nuke, I can't see them passing up the opportunity to get Korea back.

Well in the novel line, Japan wasn't able to build nuclear weapons until 1965. Even if the Race lacked the ability or willingness to nuke Japan flat in 1944, it certainly had both the ability and willingness to do so by 1965, so Japan could no more extort Korea off the Race in 1965 than the Nazis were able to export Poland from them that year.