US Balkanization- Long Term Russian Hyperpower
- Thread starter Beatriz
- Start date
I don't see Russia developing that far, considering how it was historically plagued with all sorts of issues, not to mention how the Tsars preferred that no political activity took place at all and the security services were doing their bit to enforce that. And that's before we get to the pogroms. Honestly, I think a balkanized US would be far stronger and more democratic than OTL and could collectively wield far more power than as a united entity.
And what's to day that Russia wouldn't get involved in these intra-European industrial wars?
Russia showed how ready it was to become a hyperpower in WW1: they still had a very long way to go so unless you completely change Russian politics of the 19th century they won't become even a superpower very soon.
Without the USA being a major factor in WWI the Central Powers win the war. This means the loses of Brest-Litovsk become a post war reality. Bolshevik Russia is far weaker than it was at the end of the OTL Civil War/Polish War period in 1922. Without the USA Alaska is probable part of Canada. If the Ottoman Turks are still in power at the end of WWI, they'd continue their efforts to support the national aspirations of the Turkic Peoples of Central Asia which could cause the Soviets to lose control of parts of the region.
Russia could end up in 1922 weaker than she was in 1992 without nuclear weapons to give her international weight. Japan might tear off Sakhalin Island, and the Maritime Provinces of the Soviet Far East. The USA helped in the reindustrialization of the USSR in the 20's & 30's after its all-time lows of 1922/3. Without the USA the mid 20th Century Russian Economy would be much weaker than in the OTL. In mid 20th Century Russia could be a very weak power under German domination. Germany would be the dominate power over Europe.
How subsequent history after a CP victory unfolds is an open question.
Russia could end up in 1922 weaker than she was in 1992 without nuclear weapons to give her international weight. Japan might tear off Sakhalin Island, and the Maritime Provinces of the Soviet Far East. The USA helped in the reindustrialization of the USSR in the 20's & 30's after its all-time lows of 1922/3. Without the USA the mid 20th Century Russian Economy would be much weaker than in the OTL. In mid 20th Century Russia could be a very weak power under German domination. Germany would be the dominate power over Europe.
How subsequent history after a CP victory unfolds is an open question.
There's no way they manage to do this, no matter how weak the USSR is with Brest-Litovsk borders the Ottoman Empire still has big problems of its own and the Soviet state is very good at destroying any potential threat to the state whether real or imagined.
Why would it? Japan's interests were primarily in China, they would be much more worried about the Germans trying to carve their own sphere of influence there than fighting over an island which isn't very important to them.
Absolutely not, the USSR relied only on its own resources for its forced industrialization, the US or any other state never helped the USSR, it was a complete international pariah at the time.
Under the terms of Brest-Litovsk, the Turks would be in control of Azerbaijan and most of the Southern Caucasus. The Ottomans were restored to the borders they had in 1877. This would deprive Russia of 3/4 of its oil production. By mid 1918 the Turks were in control of large parts of Northern Iran giving them influence on both sides of the Caspian Sea. The extension of Soviet power over all of the Czarist Empire isn't guaranteed.
Japan was interested in eliminating Russia as a potential rival in the far-East that could threaten Manchuria. That would include inner-Mongolia and the Sea of Japan. This concern was made even stronger because of their ideological fear of Communism. In the OTL Japan was the last of the Allied Powers to withdrew from Soviet territory. Japan had already defeated the Germans in China & the Pacific in the first year of WWI and eliminated that threat. The threat of German influence in China didn't reemerge until the end of the 1920's after Chiang Kai-shek turned on the CCP and needed new foreign military support.
Many countries traded with the USSR and sold them industrial technology and equipment. Here is an excerpt from an article on the construction of Soviet Industry.
How America Helped Build The Soviet Machine
To bring their nation to the leading edge of technology, Soviet leaders are turning to the United States. Their grandfathers did the same thing.
www.americanheritage.com
The falls of the Dnieper River, once dominated by a fortress of Ukrainian Cossacks, was chosen as the site of the most ambitious of the new construction schemes, a mammoth hydroelectric plant and regional complex. Often compared to the Muscle Shoals hydroelectric project of 1917 to 1925, which became the first unit in the Tennessee Valley Authority system, the Dnieper effort was done in American style. The Soviets named the American Hugh Cooper as chief consulting engineer. I. Aleksandrov, a Soviet engineer, headed the project. American companies supplied equipment and engineers. International General Electric built five of the nine giant generators needed; the rest were built in Leningrad under American supervision. The Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Company constructed the nine 85,000-horsepower turbines, the world’s largest. German and Swedish firms assumed responsibility for other major items, but about 70 percent of the hydroelectric equipment was American. Steam shovels, hoists, locomotives, rock drills, and construction steel also came from the United States. One American who saw the site said it looked like a “Little America” —the only unfamiliar part being the presence of women workers. When the American photographer Margaret Bourke-White visited the construction, she observed four soft-spoken Virginians in charge of the Soviets installing the turbines.
Ford Motors help create the Soviet Auto Industry. https://www.rbth.com/history/330523-why-ford-car-company-left-russia
In 1932, U.S. specialists were involved in the construction of an entirely new Soviet car plant, which soon became known as the Gorky Automobile Plant. The plant produced the legendary GAZ vehicles, built using Ford technology.
The aviation industry in WWII was heavily dependent on foreign equipment & technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispano-Suiza_12Y
The 12Y was produced under Hispano-Suiza licence in the Soviet Union as the Klimov M-100. This design led to the highly successful Klimov VK-105 series that powered the Yakovlev and Lavochkin fighters as well as the Petlyakov Pe-2 bomber. Licensed production of the early models was also undertaken in Czechoslovakia as the Avia HS 12Ydrs and in Switzerland as the HS-77.
The idea that the Soviets built their own industrial plant and technology on their own is an historical absurdity. Their own stated reason for forcing food out of the peasants for export was to pay for needed industrial imports. This idea is like much of Soviet propaganda like they invented the automobile, the airplane, and most other modern innovations. It's the product of a national inferiority complex.
Bolded part is certainly not the case, while the USSR would be much weaker than IOTL the Ottomans aren't capable of funding CA rebels enough to make something meaningful, the Soviets will more likely than not be able to take all Tsarist territories apart from those lost in Brest-Litovsk since CA opposed very little resistance IOTL.
ITTL the Germans will influence China much sooner, while they may still lose some territories there they're the n.1 power in the world and having a sphere of influence in China would be one of their goals, Japan has other focuses, Soviet influence in the Far-East is already extremely weakened due to the USSR being a shadow of OTL version and conflicts with the USSR only started once the Japanese had invaded Manchuria.
That article has no authors nor any sources and is clearly pro-US. While they received some minor help 99% of the effort is Soviet and without the US they just would've traded with someone else so I don't see how the lack of the US makes the USSR weaker.Many countries traded with the USSR and sold them industrial technology and equipment. Here is an excerpt from an article on the construction of Soviet Industry.
How America Helped Build The Soviet Machine
To bring their nation to the leading edge of technology, Soviet leaders are turning to the United States. Their grandfathers did the same thing.
They are the exception not the rule.
It was dependent in the lend-lease for some things but it would've won WW2 regardless IMO and that really has nothing to do with the forced industrialization.
The US only really entered European power games with its unconditional loans in 1915 or so. Without them the war ends years earlier and Russia would be better off with a softer loss, in manpower and territory, the latter part being in truth more of a blessing than a burden. But the biggest winners in all this would be Germany, which would get to lead a coalition as first among equals in Europe, and Japan, which would get the opportunity to absorb much of the East it into its own empire, leaving Russia as the sour loser inbetween exempt from participating in both exclusive clubs.
With all the people talking about WW1
There is no definite guarantee that WW1 of OTL happens. No guarantee that Prussia unites Germany, Austria compromises with Hungary, etc etc, due to butterfly effect.
There is no definite guarantee that WW1 of OTL happens. No guarantee that Prussia unites Germany, Austria compromises with Hungary, etc etc, due to butterfly effect.
Even with completely butterflied events in Europe the Russian Empire is still backwards compared to the rest of Europe and therefore unlikely to become a hyperpower anytime soon, WW1 is just the best example of how far Russia was from becoming the n.1 power in the world.
For most of both nations history they didn't truly ever interact until first world I and later russian revolution and then wwii
In fact most interactions with Russia had was with various European and Asian powers instead of distant USA there is no particular reasons why the reasons that prevented Russia from flourishing would still not happen here seeing as usa had no interactions
And more then that without usa if and that's very big if world wars still happend without American the situation for Russia could be worst
In fact most interactions with Russia had was with various European and Asian powers instead of distant USA there is no particular reasons why the reasons that prevented Russia from flourishing would still not happen here seeing as usa had no interactions
And more then that without usa if and that's very big if world wars still happend without American the situation for Russia could be worst
The Allied blockade of Germany was more important to the latter's defeat than direct US aid. The US indirectly helped the Allies before this as a source of loans and manufactured goods, but TTL's allies can trade with a string of USA successor states just as well as they traded with the USA itself. If the US doesn't get involved in WW1, the Central Powers would still lose, probably sometime in late 1918/early-mid 1919.
As for Russia, IIRC it was projected to overtake Germany as an industrial power sometime in the 1920s. Indeed, that was a big part of the reason why the German high command decided on war -- they saw this as perhaps their last opportunity to take Russia down a peg or two before it became too powerful. Granted, due to the population and resource differential, a Russia that possesses as much industrial capacity as Germany is still punching below its weight, but assuming nothing catastrophic occurs, I think Russia would probably be at least a superpower by the end of the 20th century.
As for Russia, IIRC it was projected to overtake Germany as an industrial power sometime in the 1920s. Indeed, that was a big part of the reason why the German high command decided on war -- they saw this as perhaps their last opportunity to take Russia down a peg or two before it became too powerful. Granted, due to the population and resource differential, a Russia that possesses as much industrial capacity as Germany is still punching below its weight, but assuming nothing catastrophic occurs, I think Russia would probably be at least a superpower by the end of the 20th century.
You talk about something what would happen something like over 130 years after the POD. Butterflies would make thins pretty unrecognsible.
And I too bit disagree with Russia being backward nation in 1914. Yes, certainly it is not on level of Britain or Germany and even lesser it is superpower but I don't see reason why it wouldn't be already developing and reforming itself. With some luck Russia could be on path becoming true European power.
And I too bit disagree with Russia being backward nation in 1914. Yes, certainly it is not on level of Britain or Germany and even lesser it is superpower but I don't see reason why it wouldn't be already developing and reforming itself. With some luck Russia could be on path becoming true European power.
It was already a "true European Power" in 1914. And the problem is largely the fact that Imperial Russia wasn't the most reformist nation ever and radical reforms like what the Soviets clearly didn't work either in the long run.
You just need more reformist minded (but not radical) and capable tsar what Nicholas II wasn't.
It still doesn't make things so easy because last time we had a liberal tsar, he was liberal for half of his reign and was far from a genius.