WI: Russia annexes East Turkestan and Mongolia

Also at no point in the USSR's existence were the two Ossetias a part of a single SSR. South Ossetia was governed by the Georgian Democratic Republic (with frequent enough Ossetian rebellions) between 1918 and 1920 and continued to be under Georgia's jurisdiction despite any change in the form of Georgia's government. North Ossetia remained under Russian rule (sort of) from 1918-1922 (when the USSR was formed) but went through a number of subordinate Soviet Republics (such as the Terek Soviet Republic, Mountain ASSR and North Caucasian Soviet Republic).

Hm, you're rightl I was thinking that Georgia exteneded North into North Ossetia at one point, though looking it up said extension was into the then Karachay Autonomous Oblast.
 
That's pretty unlikely actually. Remember that Nagorno-Karabakh was not placed in the Armenian SSR when the USSR was around. It remained a part of the Azeri SSR. And the two Ossetias were not united under one SSR (either Georgia or Russia). So it doesn't automaticallly follow that Buryatia will be added to (Outer) Mongolia. Maybe Tannu Tuva. But Buryatia? Unlikely.

That is more related to Geography. While north Osetia lies in Northern Caucasus, South lies in Southern Caucasus, thus North remained under RSFSR, South Osetia remained under Georgia.
Also it could be Stalin's thinking to make sure that there was always disputed territory.

But I still think Buryatia will be under Mongolian SSR.
 
That is more related to Geography. While north Osetia lies in Northern Caucasus, South lies in Southern Caucasus, thus North remained under RSFSR, South Osetia remained under Georgia.
Also it could be Stalin's thinking to make sure that there was always disputed territory.

But I still think Buryatia will be under Mongolian SSR.

Mountains had nothing to do with Nagorno-Karabakh not being united with Armenia.

We also have a number of other examples wherein the USSR did not merge entities containing the sme or similar ethnic groups:

- Nenets Autonomous Okrug remaining separate from the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug

- the Komi-Permyak Autonomous Okrug remaining separate from the Komi-Zyryan Autonomous Oblast (later the Komi Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic).

- the Karakalpak ASSR remaining a part of the Uzbek SSR and separate from the Kazakh SSR even though the Karakalpak language is closer to Kazakh

- Tuva remaining separate from Buryatia despite Tuva having at one time been a part of Mongolia and sharing a border with Buryatia and the Tuvans being related to Buryats

- the Agin-Buryat Autonomous Okrug and Ust-Orda Buryat Autonomous Okrug (in Irkutsk Oblast) remaining separate from the Buryat ASSR despite being close to the Buryat ASSR and despite there being examples of other entites in the USSR with exclaves (the RSFSR, Azeri SSR, Uzebk and Kirgiz SSRs (numerous tiny exclaves)).

And this is referring to areas with the same titular ethnic groups. If the USSR didn't even unite all Buryats into a single political entity then it is doubtful that it would unite the Buryat ASSR with a Mongol SSR.
 

katchen

Banned
In fact, you would probably see a Khalka ASSR as part of Chita Oblast and an Oirat ASSR as part of Irkutsk Oblast and an Rrumchi Oblast within Kasakh SSR that might include Hovd or Uliassatia. with Ulaangom part of Tuva ASSR and Uighur ASSR capitaled at Kasghar. The Russians, even and especially under Stalin's nationalities policy liked to divide nationalities as much as possible to make secession as unfeasible as possible. This is something the successor states to the USSR are still living with, particularly in Central Asia.and the Caucasus and this is why the state borders are as convoluted as they are.
 
Mountains had nothing to do with Nagorno-Karabakh not being united with Armenia.

We also have a number of other examples wherein the USSR did not merge entities containing the sme or similar ethnic groups:

- Nenets Autonomous Okrug remaining separate from the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug

- the Komi-Permyak Autonomous Okrug remaining separate from the Komi-Zyryan Autonomous Oblast (later the Komi Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic).

- the Karakalpak ASSR remaining a part of the Uzbek SSR and separate from the Kazakh SSR even though the Karakalpak language is closer to Kazakh

- Tuva remaining separate from Buryatia despite Tuva having at one time been a part of Mongolia and sharing a border with Buryatia and the Tuvans being related to Buryats

- the Agin-Buryat Autonomous Okrug and Ust-Orda Buryat Autonomous Okrug (in Irkutsk Oblast) remaining separate from the Buryat ASSR despite being close to the Buryat ASSR and despite there being examples of other entites in the USSR with exclaves (the RSFSR, Azeri SSR, Uzebk and Kirgiz SSRs (numerous tiny exclaves)).

And this is referring to areas with the same titular ethnic groups. If the USSR didn't even unite all Buryats into a single political entity then it is doubtful that it would unite the Buryat ASSR with a Mongol SSR.

While not true for all of them, some of those were'nt united for a reason, for instance Tuva was'nt merged into anything since it had always been a distinct entity, first as Tannu Uriankhai when it was part of China (and being highly autonomous under Imperial China), then an independent Republic for 23 years. Also, the Tuvans and Buryats are only generally related and more importantly speak a language from a completely different language family (Buryat is Mongolic and Tuvan is Turkic).
 
Last edited:
I was under the impression that Russia effectively ruled Kashgaria (maybe all Dzungaria) for a decade or so in the mid nineteenth century before handing it back to Chinese rule. I'd need to check my sources.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
While not true for all of them, some of those were'nt united for a reason, for instance Tuva was'nt merged into anything since it had always been a distinct entity, first as Tannu Uriankhai when it was part of China (and being highly autonomous under Imperial China), then an independent Republic for 23 years. Also, the Tuvans and Buryats are only generally related to the Buryats and more importantly speak a language from a completely different language family (Buryat is Mongolic and Tuvan is Turkic).

Fair enough, but the USSR had a history of creating autonomous entities which had two titular ethnic groups such as the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug. Or the Chechen-Ingush ASSR. Sometimes they even had autonomous entities which had a plethora of ethnic groups like the Dagestan ASSR. And of course we have the example of the Azeri SSR (which spoke a Turkic language) with a significant Armenian population (which spoke a Caucasian language unrelated to Azeri) contained within an autonomous entity inside the Azeri SSR.


So there really was no practical reason why Tuva and Buryatia were not united. Sure Tuvan is a turkic language, but so what? It is influenced by Mongolian and Tuva itself was actually a part of Mongolia under Chinese rule for a time. So it isn't as if the Tuvans weren't in such a situation before.

What katchen said seems far more likely to an extent. You would probably see a Mongol SSR containing an Oirat ASSR. And there would probably be an East Turkestan SSR with numerous ASSRs inside it for the Kazakhs, Tajiks, Kirgiz and others.
 
Mountains had nothing to do with Nagorno-Karabakh not being united with Armenia.

It is due to geography and demographic mapping.

- Tuva remaining separate from Buryatia despite Tuva having at one time been a part of Mongolia and sharing a border with Buryatia and the Tuvans being related to Buryats

- the Agin-Buryat Autonomous Okrug and Ust-Orda Buryat Autonomous Okrug (in Irkutsk Oblast) remaining separate from the Buryat ASSR despite being close to the Buryat ASSR and despite there being examples of other entites in the USSR with exclaves (the RSFSR, Azeri SSR, Uzebk and Kirgiz SSRs (numerous tiny exclaves)).

And this is referring to areas with the same titular ethnic groups. If the USSR didn't even unite all Buryats into a single political entity then it is doubtful that it would unite the Buryat ASSR with a Mongol SSR.

1. Tuvan wasn't related to Buryatia. They are 2 distinct mongolian sub-groups.
2. Between them huge Sayan Mountain not.
3. Tuvan was de-jure part of Mongolia (or precisely part of ROC) till 1944, while Buriya was part of Russian Empire since 1690's. So that's why it is separated.
4. Both was ASSR under RSFSR., or under one SSR If it was some Mongolian SSR they sure would have under one SSR.

Ust-Orda wasn't physically neighbored the Buriyatia, thus remained under Irkutsk. Same for Agin Buriyat.

Unlike this main demographic cluster of Mongolia and Buryatia is just next to each other. Also there is no big russian settlements between them. Also there is no geographic barrier.
 
It is due to geography and demographic mapping.


Ust-Orda wasn't physically neighbored the Buriyatia, thus remained under Irkutsk. Same for Agin Buriyat.


Okay then, so answer me this:

- If geography and demograhic mapping and being physically separated were the problem why Nagorno-Karabakh was not unified with Armenia and why Agin-Buryat Autonomous Okrug and Ust-Orda Buryat Autonomous Okrug were not united with the Buryat ASSR, why then was Kaliningrad placed under the RSFSR instead of the Lithuanian SSR? And why then was Nakhichevan ASSR united with the Azeri SSR despite there being a Armenia between Nakhichevan and the rest of Azerbaijan? And while you are at it, please explain Shohimardon, Sokh, Chon-Kara (or Qalacha), Jani-Ayil, Kayragach, Sarwan, Vorukh, Sankovo-Medvezhye, Artsvashen, Yukhary Askipara, Barkhudarli and Karki. That's at least 14 detached areas established and maintained during the existence of the Soviet Union disproving the idea that Nagorno-Karabakh could not unified with Armenia and that Agin-Buryat Aut Ok and Ust-Orda Buryat Aut Ok could not united with the Buryat ASSR at any point during the Soviet period.

The idea that they have to be neighbouring in order to be unified is overly simplistic to say the least.

And as shown in the case of the Nenets and Komi (examples you seem to avoid by the way), even if the entities border each other they do not have to be unified.

And as the Nenets, Ossetians, Komi, Armenians and Buryat amply demonstrate the Soviets did not always put all populations of a single ethnic group in a single entity.

So as I originally said, the idea that the Buryat ASSR would be automatically unified with Mongolia into a single Mongol SSR is not supported by the available precedents. It could have happened, but was just as likely not to have happened.

1. Tuvan wasn't related to Buryatia. They are 2 distinct mongolian sub-groups.

So what? Are all the groups in Dagestan the same? I was under the impression that you had many distinct groups in Dagestan.

And what then of the Chechen-Ingush ASSR and Kabardino-Balkar ASSR? Are we to assume that the Chechen and Ingush are actually the same and not two distinct groups or sub-groups? And that the Karbardins (who speak a Caucasian language) and Balkars (who speak a Turkic language) are the same group?

2. Between them huge Sayan Mountain not.

According to this logic, everything east of the Urals should not have been in the RSFSR......

3. Tuvan was de-jure part of Mongolia (or precisely part of ROC) till 1944, while Buriya was part of Russian Empire since 1690's. So that's why it is separated.

So since Tuva wasn't a part of the Russian Empire, why then was Tuva incorporated as an autonomous oblast (later ASSR) of the Russian SFSR instead of becoming a Tuvan SSR in it's own right like Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (which incidentally were a part of the Russian Empire but were separate SSRs....)?
 
@Chris:

I'm very curious, what is your point?

Yes, Buriyat could be part of Mongolian SSR or might not be.

My argument is being part of Mongolia is most likely, not vice verse. Because of history, geography and being one nation. It could be not all of OTL Buriyat land will be under Mongolia SSR, but certianly Southern Baikal region will be (e.g Selenge river basin). Beswt example would be Kazakhstan SSR. Kazakh Khanates submitted to Russian Empire separately but most land remained in Kazakshtan SSR.

If you think Buriyat will remain part of RSFSR, so it be. That is only your thought not fact and not certain outcome.

I don't know how I should describe you, in English (my english is very bad) maybe "hypocrisy" is the word.
 
Fair enough, but the USSR had a history of creating autonomous entities which had two titular ethnic groups such as the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug. Or the Chechen-Ingush ASSR. Sometimes they even had autonomous entities which had a plethora of ethnic groups like the Dagestan ASSR. And of course we have the example of the Azeri SSR (which spoke a Turkic language) with a significant Armenian population (which spoke a Caucasian language unrelated to Azeri) contained within an autonomous entity inside the Azeri SSR.

In most of those cases it was the result of not being able to create distinct ASSRs due to the multi-ethnic nature of them as well as the question of population.

Now the Azeri SSR was a unique case in that the Azerbaijani and Armenian SSRs originally agreed to the situation since their was no way to really divide Nagorno-Karabakh without forced relcation of most of the people living there and it did'nt become an issue until the dissolution of the USSR.
 
@Chris:

I'm very curious, what is your point?

I'll just quote myself so you can see my point:

Chris S said:
So as I originally said, the idea that the Buryat ASSR would be automatically unified with Mongolia into a single Mongol SSR is not supported by the available precedents. It could have happened, but was just as likely not to have happened.

Yes, Buriyat could be part of Mongolian SSR or might not be.

Exactly.

My argument is being part of Mongolia is most likely, not vice verse. Because of history, geography and being one nation. It could be not all of OTL Buriyat land will be under Mongolia SSR, but certianly Southern Baikal region will be (e.g Selenge river basin). Beswt example would be Kazakhstan SSR. Kazakh Khanates submitted to Russian Empire separately but most land remained in Kazakshtan SSR.

These are better reasons to imagine the unification of the Buryat ASSR or at least some of it with a Mongol SSR than what I've seen in the thread before.


I don't know how I should describe you, in English (my english is very bad) maybe "hypocrisy" is the word.

I believe the word you are looking for is "hypocrite" and I take strong offence to that given that we are supposed to be having a debate and it's NOT hypocritically to point out the flaws in another person's arguments. Thus far I have pointed out the numerous flaws in the argument that Buryat ASSR would be joined with a Mongol SSR for simplistic reasons such as ethnicity (by giving examples of ethnic groups which were not unified) and geography (by giving examples of ethnic groups that were not unified despite being in political entities neigbouring each other) and have also pointed out the flaw in the reasoning that the three Buryat entities (Buryat ASSR and the two Buryat autonomous Okrugs) were not united simply because they did not directly border each other. While those factors would play a role, a much greater role would be played by the CPSU and by key persons within the CPSU and their attitudes and ideas (for instance the Crimea is in Ukraine today primarily because of agreement between the communist governments of the RSFSR and Ukrainian SSR in the 1950s (despite years of administrative inconvenience prior to that) in part due to the strains of paying for the post-war economic recovery in Crimea, and much less so because of geography or ethnicity - had the government in the RSFSR not agreed to the transfer of Crimea or had WWII not happened and necessitated the transfer partly for economic reasons then it would likely still be in Russia today)). That, more than anything is the reason for the apparent arbitrary nature of some Soviet borders and situations and why a general policy of having unified autonomous areas for ethnic groups featured a number of exceptions and why it was by no means universal nor automatic.

If you don't like that, then that's rough because recognizing the flaws in one's argument is the only way to strengthen it. Just because you may not like criticism of an argument doesn't mean it can't help to move a debate along. It's up to you to recognize that and if you don't like it then why bother have discussions? I might have a conception and find that other people have recognized flaws in my conception. Thus I recognize my misconception and learn and can have more informed discussions in the future.
 
Last edited:
In most of those cases it was the result of not being able to create distinct ASSRs due to the multi-ethnic nature of them as well as the question of population.

The Chechen-Ingush ASSR was originally two separate autonomous oblasts merged into one (and later made into an ASSR). So in that case at least it wasn't a problem of being able to create distinct ASSRs as they previously were distinct entities.

Now the Azeri SSR was a unique case in that the Azerbaijani and Armenian SSRs originally agreed to the situation since their was no way to really divide Nagorno-Karabakh without forced relcation of most of the people living there and it did'nt become an issue until the dissolution of the USSR.

That's not what the (sourced wiki) history of the area says. Nagorno-Karabakh was originally supposed to go to the Armenian SSR along with Nakhchivan and Zangezur (the strip of land separating Nakhchivan from Azerbaijan proper). In the end however only Zangezur ended up in Armenia because The RSFSR (and later USSR) and Bolshevist governments in Azerbaijan and Armenia agreed to the resulting borders in a set of treaties with Turkey (Treaty of Moscow in 1921 and Treaty of Kars in 1923). It wasn't a case of being unable to divide Nagorno-Karabakh without forced relocation (in any case there would be no need to divide Nagorno-Karabakh or forcibly relocate any Azeris - all that need have been done was to make what was then the Nagorno-Karabakh autonomous oblast a part of the Armenian SSR since even in 1926, Armenians constituted 89% of the population and there would have been no need to remove the Azeris in the oblast even if it was transferred to Armenia)
 
Could you possibly tone it down a notch? You are edging into rudeness, and putting a lot of emotion into the discussion. The latter isn't necessarily bad, but the former adds nothing.

My thoughts as well,

I don't see any reason for it, since it would seem the primary determinant of internal Soviet borders were the personalities of the CPSU. After all it wasn't until after Stalin died that the Crimea was transferred between the RSFSR and Uk. SSR, even though apparently people in the Crimea had been advocating such a transfer to local communist party officials for at least a few years (in part because the economic recovery efforts after WWII ended up linking the Crimean and Ukrainian economies so much that it became inconvenient to deal an administration linked to the RSFSR when economically everybody dealt with the Uk. SSR; only after Stalin died did the Supreme Soviets of the RSFSR, Uk. SSR and the USSR itself bounce about the idea and approve it....I strongly suspect that pre-1953 any such move on the part of the Supreme Soviets of the RSFSR and Uk. SSR would have been met with disapproval by Stalin and the idea would have simply died in committee).

So a lot would depend on how Mongolia (and East Turkestan) end up in Russia in the first place and more crucially (assuming as few butterflies as possible) what happens to them during the Russian Revolution:

- So going with the OP of Russia annexing Mongolia and East Turkestan from China, we would see the areas divided into a number of governorates (unless Mongolia was taken in as a protectorate). These governorates would then be organized governorate-generals or krais. So we would probably have a Governorate-General of Mongolia or a Mongolia Krai (East Turkestan might have it's southern section added to the already existing Turkestan Krai)

- In 1917 you get the Russian Revolution and the chaos of OTL. This is where it becomes really important, because if during that time Mongolia becomes independent as say the Republic of Mongolia before being taken over by Bolsheviks to form the Mongolian Soviet Socialist Republic and this Mongolian SSR became one of the founding members of the USSR in 1922 (along with the 4 OTL SSRs that founded it) then the Mongolian SSR will likely have the borders of the Republic of Mongolia that declared independence in 1918-1920. So if this Mongolia does not already include Buryatia then it will require Buryatia's transfer later on. This will then require the approval of governments of the Russian SFSR, Mongolian SSR and the USSR according to the Soviet constitutions. Given that the governments of all three would be run by the communist parties of Russia, Mongolia and the Soviet Union it would then be up to the various personalities in those parties whether or not the idea of a transfer goes ahead.

- If a Mongolian SSR is not already formed with Buryatia (or at least some of Buryatia) already, then the next best time for Buryatia or part of Buryatia to be transferred would be in the 1920s to early 1930s. After that it becomes less likely under the leadership of Stalin with its associated repression and the abolition of national institutions, ethnic deportations and later Russification (especially towards those with cross border ethnic ties to foreign nation states as Mongols would unless Inner Mongolia was annexed as well; and in light of the Great Patriotic War). By the 1940s it would be extremely unlikely for any Buryat ASSR to be transferred to the Mongol SSR.

- If on the other hand Mongolia does not become independent or fully independent during the Russian Revolution it would end up becoming a part of the RSFSR, wherein a Mongol ASSR could be formed in the 1920s which included all or part of Buryatia (especially around 1923 when the Buryat were all united into a single entity which included Agin-Buryatia and Ust-Orda Buryatia). At some point in the 1920s-1940s (but more so in the 1920s) this Mongol ASSR could then be upgraded to a Mongolian SSR but during this time it might also have portions of it carved off (as Agin-Buryatia and Ust-Orda Buryatia were in 1937 from Buryatia). So there might be a Mongol SSR, but it might be that a Buryat ASSR and Oirat ASSR might be carved off from it and retained in the Russian SFSR. It all really boils down to who is in charge of policy at the time and what their personal preferences were and also what various local communist party officials wanted (which may or may not coincide with what the people in the region wanted and which may or may not be influenced by personal goals for power).
 
Last edited:
The Chechen-Ingush ASSR was originally two separate autonomous oblasts merged into one (and later made into an ASSR). So in that case at least it wasn't a problem of being able to create distinct ASSRs as they previously were distinct entities.

They were merged because they're the primary divisions of the Vainakh people, IE they're related to each other.


That's not what the (sourced wiki) history of the area says. Nagorno-Karabakh was originally supposed to go to the Armenian SSR along with Nakhchivan and Zangezur (the strip of land separating Nakhchivan from Azerbaijan proper). In the end however only Zangezur ended up in Armenia because The RSFSR (and later USSR) and Bolshevist governments in Azerbaijan and Armenia agreed to the resulting borders in a set of treaties with Turkey (Treaty of Moscow in 1921 and Treaty of Kars in 1923). It wasn't a case of being unable to divide Nagorno-Karabakh without forced relocation (in any case there would be no need to divide Nagorno-Karabakh or forcibly relocate any Azeris - all that need have been done was to make what was then the Nagorno-Karabakh autonomous oblast a part of the Armenian SSR since even in 1926, Armenians constituted 89% of the population and there would have been no need to remove the Azeris in the oblast even if it was transferred to Armenia)

The whole situation was complex, yes, but overall if the Armenian and Azeri SSRs had really wanted to change things the Union government would most likely have agreed (especially given so much of the leadership was from Caucasia), it's just that during the time of the Soviet Union it simply was'nt an issue since the area was all part of the same country.
 

katchen

Banned
A lot would depend on what the demographics of East Turkestan and Mongolia were and the routing of the Tans-Siberian Railroad, which stimulated a great deal of Russian settlement all along it's route as soon as it was built. IOTL, the Trans-Siberian was built roughly along the Tract, the Siberian road to Irkutsk, then east through Trans-Baikalia to Chita and then initially through Manchruia to Vladivostok because the Russians were able to bribe Ch'ing officials to approve the right of way.

The fully Russian right of way through the Amur Valley was not completed until the 1920s. And there was a segment around Lake Baikal which was uncompleted in 1905 because it involved blasting the right of way throgh sheer cliffs at the base of the Southern end of Lake Baikal. For a few years, during the winter, tracks would be laid the few miles across the ice and either scarifices to the melt or picked up again when the ice was about to melt with a rail ferry operating in the summer months.

Which means that if ITTL, a different routing for the Trans-Siberian Railroad would likely become more attractive, either proceeding to Irkutsk as OTTL than up the Irkut River and around the mountains south of Lake Baikal to the Selenge vValley and ten to Urga, the Herelen Valley and then to Hailar and through Manchruia to Vladivostok. Or from Omssk up the Irtysh all the way to Altai, across the desert to Urumchi, thence to Hami and fromthere across to Tsetserleg, Urga and the Herelen Valley. Either routing would bring Russian settlement to a Mongolia in which ppopulation had been deliberately kept depressed by the practice of inducting large numbers of men into Buddhist monateries.

In fact, even if the Tract-Irkutsk-Urga routing was chosen, Urumchi would get a railroad, since the railroad to Tashkent and Alma-Ata was complete by 1905 and it's extension to Urumchi via the Ili and Ining could be complete within another year or two, with Hami a year later (As well as backtracking up the Tarim Valley to Kasghar, Yarkand and Khotan).. At that point (and this is a MAJOR departure from OTTL) it would be as easy for the Russians to extend the line from the Hami railhead down the Kansu Corridor to Lanzhou and on to Beijing via the Hwang Ho Valley and Dadong, Sian and from there, Beijing via Daiyuan, Nanjing via Nanyang or even over the Tsinling Shan to Sichuan and Chengdu, Chongjing and Kumning to hook up with the French lines to Indochina (since Russia had warm relations with France).

Which is why the British were so dead set against the Russians expanding into East Turkestan OTTL and might very well respond to the attempt ITTL by acquiring Tibet as a protectorate in order to protect the approaches to British India. The British might even insist on holding Russia to East Turkestan North of the Tien Shan with China keeping the Uighur Tarim as a buffer zone and Russia getting Urumchi and Hami and Mongolia only. The British might then find it a matter of urgency to build their own railroad from Northwest India to China utulizing the Indus and Shyok Valleys and either crossing the Kunluns along the current Chinese road to Yarkand and proceeding East along the traditional silk road before crossing into the Tsaidam Basin or pioneering a right of way on the South side of the Kunlun Mountains across the permafrost that is free of snow (and caravan routes) because it is totally arid, until it reaches the upper Hwang Ho.

As well as a railroad up the Sultej and down the Tsangpo to Lhasa forcibly opening up Tibet to the outside world and British exploitation. If the British could not find Tibetans who would work on building these railroads at high altitudes they could bring in Qechuan and Aymara laborers from Peru and Bolivia (and introduce alpacas and possibly potatoes and quinoa) who would.:(
 
They were merged because they're the primary divisions of the Vainakh people, IE they're related to each other.

I really doubt that was the actual reason they were merged (do you have a source for that assertion?). Given when they were merged and who was in charge, I would suspect it had more to do with party politics (perhaps the Ingush party officials fell out of favour with "Uncle Joe" himself).

After all, it was around this same time that Ust-Orda Buryatia and Agin-Buryatia were separated from Buryatia and we are talking about areas containing people who are more than just primary divisions of a larger set, but are actually from the same group. Likewise, we did not see a move to merge other related ethnic groups at the time (like the Ossetians or the East Slavs).

A lot would depend on what the demographics of East Turkestan and Mongolia were and the routing of the Tans-Siberian Railroad, which stimulated a great deal of Russian settlement all along it's route as soon as it was built. IOTL, the Trans-Siberian was built roughly along the Tract, the Siberian road to Irkutsk, then east through Trans-Baikalia to Chita and then initially through Manchruia to Vladivostok because the Russians were able to bribe Ch'ing officials to approve the right of way.

The fully Russian right of way through the Amur Valley was not completed until the 1920s. And there was a segment around Lake Baikal which was uncompleted in 1905 because it involved blasting the right of way throgh sheer cliffs at the base of the Southern end of Lake Baikal. For a few years, during the winter, tracks would be laid the few miles across the ice and either scarifices to the melt or picked up again when the ice was about to melt with a rail ferry operating in the summer months.

Which means that if ITTL, a different routing for the Trans-Siberian Railroad would likely become more attractive, either proceeding to Irkutsk as OTTL than up the Irkut River and around the mountains south of Lake Baikal to the Selenge vValley and ten to Urga, the Herelen Valley and then to Hailar and through Manchruia to Vladivostok. Or from Omssk up the Irtysh all the way to Altai, across the desert to Urumchi, thence to Hami and fromthere across to Tsetserleg, Urga and the Herelen Valley. Either routing would bring Russian settlement to a Mongolia in which ppopulation had been deliberately kept depressed by the practice of inducting large numbers of men into Buddhist monateries.

Interesting ideas. And what is also interesting is that some of these alternate routes (including the route north of lake Baikal) were proposed in OTL as alternates to the current Tran-Siberian Railroad route before it was completed.

What might happen is that the OTL route is chosen but a couple of major branches are also built to include Urga, the Herelen Valley, Hailar and Urumchi.

The introduction of Russian settlers into Mongolia itself though will change the dynamics of the region. Depending on when Mongolia is annexed (before or after the OTL route for the Trans-Siberian is mostly completed) then this would also affect what happens to Mongolia in the event that we get a USSR later on due to minimal butterflies. We might never see a Mongol SSR but only a Mongol ASSR.

In fact, even if the Tract-Irkutsk-Urga routing was chosen, Urumchi would get a railroad, since the railroad to Tashkent and Alma-Ata was complete by 1905 and it's extension to Urumchi via the Ili and Ining could be complete within another year or two, with Hami a year later (As well as backtracking up the Tarim Valley to Kasghar, Yarkand and Khotan).. At that point (and this is a MAJOR departure from OTTL) it would be as easy for the Russians to extend the line from the Hami railhead down the Kansu Corridor to Lanzhou and on to Beijing via the Hwang Ho Valley and Dadong, Sian and from there, Beijing via Daiyuan, Nanjing via Nanyang or even over the Tsinling Shan to Sichuan and Chengdu, Chongjing and Kumning to hook up with the French lines to Indochina (since Russia had warm relations with France).

That would be interesting if it did ever happen. That alone might introduce a number of butterflies into the TL.

Which is why the British were so dead set against the Russians expanding into East Turkestan OTTL and might very well respond to the attempt ITTL by acquiring Tibet as a protectorate in order to protect the approaches to British India. The British might even insist on holding Russia to East Turkestan North of the Tien Shan with China keeping the Uighur Tarim as a buffer zone and Russia getting Urumchi and Hami and Mongolia only. The British might then find it a matter of urgency to build their own railroad from Northwest India to China utulizing the Indus and Shyok Valleys and either crossing the Kunluns along the current Chinese road to Yarkand and proceeding East along the traditional silk road before crossing into the Tsaidam Basin or pioneering a right of way on the South side of the Kunlun Mountains across the permafrost that is free of snow (and caravan routes) because it is totally arid, until it reaches the upper Hwang Ho.

I had forgotten about British India in all of this. And yes, that does seem correct. Britain is unlikely to be okay with Russia annexing all of East Turkestan even if it occurred during the entente cordiale with France and the Franco-Russian alliance. So an annexation of northern East turkestan with the remainder being Chinese and Tibet taking on a bit more importance to them.
 
Last edited:
Top