I wouldn´t put to much stock in what Mr Åslund says he was after all one of the proponents of the kleptocracy that followed the fall of the SU and wanted Sweden to adopt the same policies.
Whiskey on the Rocks, The Soviet-Swedish War of 1981
- Thread starter Jim Smitty
- Start date
I wouldn´t put to much stock in what Mr Åslund says he was after all one of the proponents of the kleptocracy that followed the fall of the SU and wanted Sweden to adopt the same policies.
I Soviet Union that could feed herself, goes a long way to helping its survive past 1991. Because a full man stays happy, a hungery man starts trouble.
I was also think I leaner slimmer Soviet military would help it live on. Only one class gets drafted a year instead of two. Officers who can't hack it, are moved to resverse units or admin units. They keep getting pay, but moved out of the way to allow men with skill take on leadership poisitions. Because wasn't the normal age for a regemiental commander late 40s or early 50s? Thats to old for that type of command, at that age your should at a min be a division commander if not higher. Shit just start forcing the old fucks to retire, give them a pension so the younger men could start moving up. But a whole book could be writien about the problems with the Soviet military in the 80s. Hell I dont even think one book could cover it all. But you get the idea, massive reform within the Soviet military.
Also at the same time, start hunting down the fucking Russian mob. This should help with the corruption problems being faced at every level of the Soviet System. I say send the Spetsnazs after their sorry asses. At the same time have a few public show trails of officers or managers of factories for corruption. I know you can't stomp out corruption in the Soviet Union, but if you could reduce it that will help the Soviets live to seee another day.
Eastern Europe is lost, as is the Batlic and Caucasus. But a core of the Soviet Union could live on. Shortly becoming what China is today.
I was also think I leaner slimmer Soviet military would help it live on. Only one class gets drafted a year instead of two. Officers who can't hack it, are moved to resverse units or admin units. They keep getting pay, but moved out of the way to allow men with skill take on leadership poisitions. Because wasn't the normal age for a regemiental commander late 40s or early 50s? Thats to old for that type of command, at that age your should at a min be a division commander if not higher. Shit just start forcing the old fucks to retire, give them a pension so the younger men could start moving up. But a whole book could be writien about the problems with the Soviet military in the 80s. Hell I dont even think one book could cover it all. But you get the idea, massive reform within the Soviet military.
Also at the same time, start hunting down the fucking Russian mob. This should help with the corruption problems being faced at every level of the Soviet System. I say send the Spetsnazs after their sorry asses. At the same time have a few public show trails of officers or managers of factories for corruption. I know you can't stomp out corruption in the Soviet Union, but if you could reduce it that will help the Soviets live to seee another day.
Eastern Europe is lost, as is the Batlic and Caucasus. But a core of the Soviet Union could live on. Shortly becoming what China is today.
Jim, I am from the former Eastern Block and I can tell you this: EE is lost - period. It will went away and become part of Western Europe again and of NATO and the EU later on. The Soviet Union will become 'New China' until mid 2000's when it will be overshadowed by China itself and then India in early 2010's. The USSR simply doesn't have a sufficient population for pulling this off. Most of the geopolitical/geofinancial/geoeconomical sh*t China is capable to pull off is only because of its MASSIVE population.
I don't understand why out of nowhere you are trying to ASB-wank the Soviets. You could succeed in it without major ASB-iness if your TL started in the early 60's and involved a POD with Khrushchev.
If you want to prime up some enemy worthy of the 'West' then perhaps do so with the Chinese or Indians getting more competent.
Good point, Durabys. I was going have China fall to the Tiananmen square protest of 89. If the army refuse, the leaders of the PRC lose there power base. Then a Second Korean War, with NK loosing their money from the PRC, i see the Kims doing something dumb, to spark it.
Maybe have the USSR fall in the mid 90s?
Maybe have the USSR fall in the mid 90s?
The Baltics dont have to be lost send in the army and allow them to bash heads like the CCP did in 1989, the other WP states are most likely lost and and probably the Caucasus ( or a prolonged Chechnya type war). As the Eastern European nations experience the collapse of their economies the new wealthy SU may well be an alternative to the EU for those seeking jobs.
Have China reform into a democracy..which cuts ties with NK! Make it into a bigger problem, culturally and economically wise, for the West then the surviving but falling USSR.
EternalCynic said:
Generally speaking I believe most changes in Finland would be in the internal politics. How Koivisto handed the situation will mean a lot for his ascencion to the presidency in 1982. If he really botched it and was seen as weak, he might lose the election to Holkeri (Nat. Coalition) or Virolainen (Centre). But it is a long shot, because he was well-liked and had a lot of support; by acting decisively and standing up to Soviet demands he would make sure he wins the election as comfortably as he did IOTL.
There might be some butterflies for the 1983 parliamentary elections too, which might see the conservative National Coalition cash in on anti-Soviet sentiment and become the biggest party in stead of the Social Democrats. They would have to be subtle about campaigning on anti-Soviet themes, though. The campaign would probably look just highly patriotic and "Nordic" as in building solidarity with Sweden. The SMP might be even more vocal, however, and might win more seats than IOTL. the Swedish People's Party would also be likely to mobilize its base for bigger-than OTL gains. The far-left SKDL was due to lose a lot of seats anyway, and an anti-Soviet wave might see it drop below 20 seats (26 IOTL).
If the NC wins, it would probably build a coalition cabinet with the SDP, though as always with Finnish politics, the party talks might be surprising and pretty much any coalition with any two of the Big Three could eventually emerge from the pipeline. How the parties acted during the war would be important in regards to the talks. Looking out for the national interest. Nordic co-operation and "maintaining friendly relations" with the USSR would be seen in a much starker light than IOTL, in these talks as well as in Finnish politics in general in TTLs 80s.
If the USSR is too pushy about the FCMA Treaty provisions during the war (as I believe it would be) Koivisto as a president might turn more critical of the Eastern neighbour due to the war. One major butterfly might be that the teaty might not get renewed in 1983 as it was IOTL, but the Finnish government would hold back until it was due to expire in 1990. Depending on how the situation in the USSR and Finno-Swedish relations develop in the late 80s, the treaty might not get renewed at all after that.
That in turn might expedite Finland's Western integration and Sweden going NATO might also see Finland as a NATO member as soon as the USSR collapses.
Are you thinking of the Porkkala area? It was only in Soviet hands between 1944-56. Upinniemi, a part of the formerly leased area, was in 1981 as it is today one of the Finnish Navy's main bases. There were no Soviet troops or bases in Finland in 1981.
Otis R. Needleman
Banned
A few thoughts...
Jim, another great story. Enjoyed it. Understand you have a bunch more in the pipeline, but I'd suggest quality over quantity.
Agree the USSR was doomed, no matter what happened. Today's Russia still doesn't have much of an NCO corps. They rely on "michmen" (warrant officers) and officers to do most of the things NCOs do anywhere else. Don't know when Russia will ever make the investments and develop that NCO corps. One thing we do in our military assistance to other countries is work to build that NCO corps. You'll also see foreign NCOs attending US NCO/Senior NCO academies.
Jim, another great story. Enjoyed it. Understand you have a bunch more in the pipeline, but I'd suggest quality over quantity.
Agree the USSR was doomed, no matter what happened. Today's Russia still doesn't have much of an NCO corps. They rely on "michmen" (warrant officers) and officers to do most of the things NCOs do anywhere else. Don't know when Russia will ever make the investments and develop that NCO corps. One thing we do in our military assistance to other countries is work to build that NCO corps. You'll also see foreign NCOs attending US NCO/Senior NCO academies.
In terms of geopolitics, I would agree that that's quite likely. The Democrats would in this world have a lot more Henry M. Jackson types.
As far as having the Soviet Union survive, that's hard, and people here are right in saying that the nation was an economic mess, and that the generals will not like having their expenditures singled out. But even many of them by mid-1981 were well aware of just how ugly the economic problems of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics were. The population knew it long before, too. Gorbachev's mistake was glasnost, the openness causing Soviet society, which had been since Stalin a system run by fear. Gorbachev's trying to change that destroyed everything. But if they go for the restructuring part without the glasnost, it might just succeed, and the problem of the Marshals being angry about it all would surely have been pushed aside by the fact that the mighty Red Army couldn't destroy small Sweden's armed forces, and the fact that the Red Army followed Moscow's orders, every time. If the Party can be convinced to go for the restructuring, then the Army will follow. They won't like it, but it won't really matter.
I could see some major reforms helping them hold on for a couple more years, but they'll be circling the drain the wholetime.
I foresee some Vlad Tepes shit form Korea.
Perhaps China is found to be supporting/aiding/assisting N Korea in secret... and the above mentioned "something dumb" causes a spark that leads to massive reform in China. Trying to distance themselves from the Regime by having those in power in the PRC giving themselves nice pensions or some kind of amnesty; trying to evade blame.
Any Second Korean War in the early 90s would be close to or in Vlad Tepers terriotry. When you are as twisted as the Kims are, and have chemical and bio weapon to use to try and save your sorry ass....
I think you see were I'm going there.
Nope, two words for you, Tiananmen Square.
South American war. What are we going to be seeing? A possible Chile-UK alliance or possibly even the US throwing in? I know that the US was asked/offered aid to the UK, but ended up not giving much if any aid. And what does Peru want from Chile anyway? I'm not aware of them having any sort of border dispute.
The US offered them material aid. However, there were some in the Reagan administration who wanted to support Argentina as a possible ally against communist movements in South America.
Not since the War of the Pacific as far as I know. I don't know if Peru held onto claims to the land Chile took from Peru during that war.
I can't remember nor find where I read (was probably in this forum) that when the US offered actual military support, it was declined, and that the UK chose to take only material support, in order to show that they could handle their own affairs.
Probably in one of the many Falklands threads in Chat.
But yeah, the US was the UK's best friend in this war, even if some (*cough* Kirkpatrick) wanted to be Argentina's.
As to the South American War, at the moment, it will be the UK, Argentina, and Chile. Possibly others. So yeah, think about it.
It would be the only thing that could keep the OTL curbstomp that the UK inflicted on Argentina from being even worse.
I wonder if Bolivia would get in on the action? Seems like that would be pushing it.
Jesus F...ing H-Christ!I JUST KNEW CRAP LIKE THIS WAS GOING TO BE FLYING THROUGH THE AIR THIRTY YEARS DOWN THE LINE!!!
From the moment the preparations for sending the task force began, the British came to the US with an extensive laundry list of orders for emergency materials to be sent ASAP. By the time the flotilla sailed, they were stuffed with American weapons and materiel (especially from the USMC). That included full usage of the American air force base on Ascension Island).
Mind, Britain PAID for everything they got.
Also, much of Britain's ordnance consisted of untouchable NATO war stocks (including vital AIM-9 Advanced Sidewinders) that the US replaced so they could be used.
SecState ALexander Haig wanted to try diplomacy, which he did, and failed in. UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick argued for strict neutrality, on the grounds that on many UN votes the UK also went for neutrality against US wishes (Israeli votes, I suspect). But it was SecDef Caspar Weinberger who wanted total support for the UK, short of war with Argentina. Reagan went with his old friend Weinberger, while giving Haig a deadline.
1) Unless your definition of "a lot of aid" would have consisted of two Nimitiz battle groups?
I'm just talking supplies, mostly munitions and the like.
What about an economic reform but no to weak political one? Authoritarians forcing trough a slow liberalisation of the Soviet economy while subsequently smashing any attempt at insubordination or vows for national independence.
A perestroika but no glasnost.
A new purge has already been hinted at, and I personally believe only one of unforeseen magnitude could get that done.
Starts to look like Gorbachev or who ever is running the SU(Either in a triumvirate or otherwise) is on track to become the economically liberal version of Stalin...
A perestroika but no glasnost.
A new purge has already been hinted at, and I personally believe only one of unforeseen magnitude could get that done.
Starts to look like Gorbachev or who ever is running the SU(Either in a triumvirate or otherwise) is on track to become the economically liberal version of Stalin...