WI: Gorbachev, Thatcher, and Mondale

I think that Mondale would have tried to heal fractured relations with the Soviet Union and would have looked for detente with them.
.

In my view that would've been very fool hardy and would've ultimately served to undermine Gorbachev and strengthen the hardliners.
 
In this scenario the U.S. economy did not recover by 1984 and Walter Mondale defeats Ronald Reagan in the 1984 election.
Let's assume the economy is stagnant and limping along. Mondale beats Reagan. Thatcher narrowly wins, it's close.

With a crummy economy, there's going to be more scapegoating. Or, rather the scapegoating that's always there is going to find more traction. Against Soviets, and anyone else who can be viewed as 'the other.'

One area, is that Fritz might decide on a very steady eddie policy of building up conventional forces in Europe. There were a couple of dangerous asymmetries in Europe. We had fewer conventional forces than the Warsaw Pact and depended on nukes as a last resort. The Soviets said they would not launch first, but would launch a full retaliatory strike if ever hit.

The question is always the transition. Just because the end result of equal conventional forces is more stable is no guarantee that the process will be. Takes good delegation, staying informed, listening to your military people, adjusting and adapting as you go, etc.
 
Last edited:
In the anthology "Alternate Presidents" the one for Mondale being president had a feckless Mondale Admin. allowing communist guerrilla movements in Latin America to take over Mexico and the U.S./Mexican border was flooded with 1 million illegal immigrants per month

The short story was told through the eyes of a Houston area INF agent.

What would he have done to prevent Mexico being taken over by communists?

Certainly not military intervention.

I really hope you're not basing your impression of Mondale on some AH short story that, from its synopsis alone, shows that the author clearly didn't understand the geopolitical situation in Latin America and especially Mexico in the 1980s.
 
By calming relations that have reached a boiling point? How?

By 1985 relations were already starting to improve between the U.S. and U.S.S.R.

After the War Scare of 1983 (Able Archer) the Reagan Admin. had dialed back on the most inflammatory rhetoric.
 
Regarding Able Archer, I think Reagan can receive credit for in a very matter-of-fact way reducing the raise. Now, you can't actually reduce the raise in a game of poker but you sometimes can in real life.

I think Reagan received reports that the Soviets were taking this way seriously, and he easily and confidently reduced the role of political leaders in the exercise. Have two sources, would like to get more.
Did President Reagan pare back Able Archer?
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=380118
 
Last edited:
In the anthology "Alternate Presidents" the one for Mondale being president had a feckless Mondale Admin. allowing communist guerrilla movements in Latin America to take over Mexico and the U.S./Mexican border was flooded with 1 million illegal immigrants per month

The short story was told through the eyes of a Houston area INF agent.

What the fuck? That would not have happened in the case of a Mondale presidency. That's just stupid.

Mondale is more competent than that.
The stories in that collection are not exactly models of plausibility.
Michael Dukakis is elected President in 1988, but is revealed to be an alien attempting to infiltrate Dulce Base. The Men in Black along with friendly aliens therefore rewrite history in order for George H. W. Bush to win the 1988 election instead.
:rolleyes:
 
Which is why this board is about "alternate history" and not "history" correct?

It still has to be plausible. A Mondale presidency will not in itself cause Mexico to fall to communists. Please explain how a Mondale presidency would lead to that happening.
 
It still has to be plausible. A Mondale presidency will not in itself cause Mexico to fall to communists. Please explain how a Mondale presidency would lead to that happening.

I would assume he radically cut backs U.S. support to anti communist regimes and forces in central America.
 
I would assume he radically cut backs U.S. support to anti communist regimes and forces in central America.

To my knowledge, Mondale was not that dovish. I'm not sure about his views towards intervention though.

I also don't think Mexico ever came close to a communist revolution.
 
These anti-communist regimes in Central America were just terrible. They massacred and murdered large numbers of their own citizens.
 

trajen777

Banned
Grew up in Minnesota -- went to Mac. college / Mondale went their for couple of years well before me. Basically was Humphrey's guy. Was well liked but had way over maxed out in just his role as a Senator. He would have been a disaster and been rolled by Gorbachev and Thatcher. He would not have spent Russia out of the game
 
To my knowledge, the Mexican communists were never strong enough nor had the same amount of popular support to take control of the nation.
Also by the 1980s the Mexican Communists had by and large embraced Eurocommunism, which believes in the electoral system and rejects ideas like dictatorship of the proletariat. So even if they gained enough strength they'd just win an election and govern democratically. Also they wouldn't be allies of the USSR, because the USSR disliked Eurocommunism and Eurocommunists disliked the USSR.

I can only think of one Latin American nation that could have fallen to Communism in the 1980s (and even then it's a long shot). But I seriously doubt Peru is a major threat to US national security.
 
Last edited:
As far as the Cold War and us propping up "anti-communist" dictators,

We fully supported Suharto in Indonesia in 1965 when he massacred large numbers of communist party members, as well as ethnic Chinese. Including handing over lists of party members. I had a former boss who, when I told him about this, said, sometimes you have to be tough. Alright, if you think this might be justifiable in some circumstances, did those particular circumstances apply?

And we view it through that lense of ideology, but again, a lot of it was just killing of ethnic Chinese. A whole lot more is going on than just the preferred one-dimensional ideology we're focused and fixated on.

This was during the heyday of Lyndon Johnson. So, if we're going to criticize Reagan as I do, we can just as well criticize Johnson. It's the shared assumptions of the Cold War, deferring to the military establishment, all of that.
 
Last edited:
Top