A New Beginning - Our 1992 Russian Federation
- Thread starter panpiotr
- Start date
-
- Tags
- russia russian federation
Too expensive and It will take a lot of time.But Having a fast rail line network in European part of Russia seems nice.
1. Please write down, how should the Russian government deal with the newest developments in Germany and Poland, which would change balance of power in Eastern and Central Europe?
I'll add my support to @Kriss's plan.
2. Please write down, how should the Russian government utilize Russia Today for its purposes?
I'll add my support to @Beaux Arts & Crafts's and @Fratsup's ideas.
3. Following the controversy surrounding portrayal of Prophet Muhammad in Denmark, a series of attacks of Danish businesses and diplomatic mission were perpetrated by Muslims living in Russia, voicing their support to boycotting Denmark and Danish businesses in Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union. Please write down, how should the Russian government react to this situation?
I'll add my support to @Kriss's plan.
4. Please write down, how the city of Moscow and the metropolitan area could be transformed into a megalopolis of the 21st century?
Again I'll add my support to @Kriss's plan.
I'll add my support to @Kriss's plan.
2. Please write down, how should the Russian government utilize Russia Today for its purposes?
I'll add my support to @Beaux Arts & Crafts's and @Fratsup's ideas.
3. Following the controversy surrounding portrayal of Prophet Muhammad in Denmark, a series of attacks of Danish businesses and diplomatic mission were perpetrated by Muslims living in Russia, voicing their support to boycotting Denmark and Danish businesses in Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union. Please write down, how should the Russian government react to this situation?
I'll add my support to @Kriss's plan.
4. Please write down, how the city of Moscow and the metropolitan area could be transformed into a megalopolis of the 21st century?
Again I'll add my support to @Kriss's plan.
Matador de Lagartos
Banned
1. Please write down, how should the Russian government deal with the newest developments in Germany and Poland, which would change balance of power in Eastern and Central Europe?
We shouldn't encourage Ukraine to arm themselves to counterbalance Poland when there's a good perspective of having to intervene in their civil war soon. Selling too many guns which could be used against us is foolish.
The spectre of having to fight Poland is just a rumour, our need to keep Ukraine down is very real.
As far as the Union State is aware, Ukraine should be as much a demilitarized state as we can get away with, at least before we could consolidate our control over Kiev after the 2014 coup.
We shouldn't encourage Ukraine to arm themselves to counterbalance Poland when there's a good perspective of having to intervene in their civil war soon. Selling too many guns which could be used against us is foolish.
The spectre of having to fight Poland is just a rumour, our need to keep Ukraine down is very real.
As far as the Union State is aware, Ukraine should be as much a demilitarized state as we can get away with, at least before we could consolidate our control over Kiev after the 2014 coup.
Last edited:
Civil war is unlikely as previously discussed and as a member of CSTO they will have access to these weapons anyway, trying to keep them intentionally weak will just cause them to seek help elsewhere
For now having a friendly military power to counterbalance Poland is good idea as we don't have to shoulder that burden ourselves, not to mention the fact that this further helps us build warm relations with Ukraine and CSTO.
Also potential danger of secession is exactly the reason why we should arm Ukraine. We need to make sure that Russian friendly government in Kiev has enough weapons to crush any seccessionist attempts and to deter any aggression. Not to mention to have them be able to stand on their two feats after initial crisis.
Last edited:
Matador de Lagartos
Banned
They are going to buy weapons of us, this is natural and beneficial, what we don't want is to create an agenda to rearm them more than what they themselves are pursuing now, which is irrational considering what is about to happen. We are going to have to organize a coup to rid Kiev of a anti-Russia regime.
Poland isn't doing nothing, this is just posture. We can use Ukraine to counterbalance Poland latter when we already have Ukraine fully consolidated. If Galicia rises up, so be it, we can deal with this when it happen, they can get crushed easily with our help. I'm more worried with the scenario of the whole Ukraine rising against us, which is a thing Russia can't cope properly, as it showed OTL.
Last edited:
This is also what we are doing, we have no influence over what they see as a threat but giving them access to same military gear like Poland has is productive for our relations as that guarantees that they won't seek help elsewhere.
Not to mention if they feel that they need to balance Poland, then we will give them the means. This is part if the scheme to bring Ukraine closer to us and to prevent Poland from presenting itself as military power in the region and third security guarantee besides USA and us. Ukraine can take the role if regional power friendly towards us.
Politicians in universe will be able to see that then and respond accordingly, but we shall still give a nice diplomatic gest to Ukraine and encourage them to build further warm ties with us.
Also Ukraine is already consolidated from any political perspective. They are in our economic and military organizations, they are friendly to us and behave like any friendly pro Russian independent country. Any further consolidation would be Installation of puppet government and while that is in plans in the thread we and politicians in Moscow have no reason to push for it, or expect that to happen as of now. What we are doing is a perfectly normal response that takes into account that Ukraine as of now is sovereign and friendly pro Russian state that we want to bring even closer to us and who we want to treat as an ally.
In regards to whole Ukraine rising, we already have this discussion and i believe that it's highly unlikely to happen as they simply don't have reason to do so. They can get closer to us, or decide to distance themselves from us like any sovereign country, but they cannot rise against us as we don't control them.
Last edited:
Matador de Lagartos
Banned
The author literally said we are getting a anti-Russian government in Kiev, and that we are going to be forced to stage a coup to preserve our influence. This fully invalidates any proposition that Ukraine is firmly on our sphere of influence.
Last edited:
We are unlikely to get anty Russian government given that most of the population is pro Russian, what we will get is probably a coalition government with Pro Western President leading it which is a normal thing.
Pro Western President doesn't mean anty Russian stance as that person still won't be able to get Ukraine out of EEU and CIS, or CSTO as most of the parties in power will be pro Russian.
Situation we will have will be anty establishment President probably coming to power on the back of antycorruption campaign with coalition of Pro Western and Pro Russian parties which isn't unusual as these divides are common in politics.
As said before, i simply don't see whole Ukraine suddenly turning anty Russian, or ditching EEU/CIS and CSTO. More likely as author said we will see Euroasian reforms coming into play with most of the population in Ukraine and it's parties supporting it with President being strongarmed by USA into stopping them.
Last edited:
And on that note, pro-Western political figures would be more likely to advocate a neutralist stance as opposed to outright alignment with the West, now you mentioned it.
I will vote for Kriss plan
On the matter of Ukraine, I don't want to sound paranoid but we should be wary of seeing how the chips fall but same time let them continue in peace if it looks safe.
By that, I don't see anything wrong with a Ukrainian leader acknowledging their ties to Russia while also seeking to preserve their own culture while also seeking to balance their position in Europe. Sometimes the relationship between states even very close ones can ebb and flow and trying to force 100% devotion to Russian interests before they become fully intertwined with the Union will ruin that possibility. We can give rewards for doing so but showing some respect will make people less inclined to join Russia a bit more palpable about and feel they can vent at times.
However we should still watch them, both because it's rather convenient to see how big a pro US voice exists in Ukraine but also just in case the Pro US president loses control of his party expecting more than just a balancing act. It only takes takes a couple of radical people to pull a position into a confrontational position rather keep up to development to smother if it arises as soon as possible.
On the matter of Ukraine, I don't want to sound paranoid but we should be wary of seeing how the chips fall but same time let them continue in peace if it looks safe.
By that, I don't see anything wrong with a Ukrainian leader acknowledging their ties to Russia while also seeking to preserve their own culture while also seeking to balance their position in Europe. Sometimes the relationship between states even very close ones can ebb and flow and trying to force 100% devotion to Russian interests before they become fully intertwined with the Union will ruin that possibility. We can give rewards for doing so but showing some respect will make people less inclined to join Russia a bit more palpable about and feel they can vent at times.
However we should still watch them, both because it's rather convenient to see how big a pro US voice exists in Ukraine but also just in case the Pro US president loses control of his party expecting more than just a balancing act. It only takes takes a couple of radical people to pull a position into a confrontational position rather keep up to development to smother if it arises as soon as possible.
1 - I support @Kriss's proposal
2 - I support @Beaux Arts & Crafts 's proposal
3 - a mix of @Fratsup and @Kriss , defending the freedom of expression of some and of choice of others, but above all, channeling it through a legal channel for those who feel offended
4 - I support @Kriss 's proposal
2 - I support @Beaux Arts & Crafts 's proposal
3 - a mix of @Fratsup and @Kriss , defending the freedom of expression of some and of choice of others, but above all, channeling it through a legal channel for those who feel offended
4 - I support @Kriss 's proposal
@dunHozzie you can post a defense budget ranking, while @Imp can do the population ranking for 2006, if you want.
From a military perspective, allowing us to get access to or even ownership of the Ukrainian arms industry would be good. With the rearment of our forces, especially high tech, we need more military factories. The former Soviet facilities in the Ukraine are solid, though old. We could use them.
So how about a 51-49 (Ukrainian- Union) ownership model for them?
So how about a 51-49 (Ukrainian- Union) ownership model for them?
Last edited:
Honestly i would say that same goes for civilian automotive industry. As i wrote Ukraine inherited part of Soviet potential and capacity to produce around 200k units of all types and in my Update that capacity will increase to 280k in coming decade so it wouldn't be unusual for Russia to buy a share of Ukrainian companies for it own use and to modernize them under the same model.
Part of these cars do go for the Union State, but most go to Ukrainian and forgein markets.
Defence budget ranking (2006)
For 2006 I have the following (in billions of Dollars)
Union State GDP: $3.856,469
Union State Budget: $925,553 (24% of GDP)
Union Military Budget: $77,129 (2% of GDP)
I calculated the difference between OTL 2003 numbers and your 2003 numbers, applied them to OTL 2006 numbers for all countries except for the USA, China and the Union State. For the USA, the number is wayyy to big for their budget. So the USA is OTL 2006. For China I used ITIL 2003 plus 113.5 % (USA growth between 2003 and 2006). For the Union State I used the budget above.
That leads to the following list in billions of Dollars:
Union State GDP: $3.856,469
Union State Budget: $925,553 (24% of GDP)
Union Military Budget: $77,129 (2% of GDP)
I calculated the difference between OTL 2003 numbers and your 2003 numbers, applied them to OTL 2006 numbers for all countries except for the USA, China and the Union State. For the USA, the number is wayyy to big for their budget. So the USA is OTL 2006. For China I used ITIL 2003 plus 113.5 % (USA growth between 2003 and 2006). For the Union State I used the budget above.
That leads to the following list in billions of Dollars:
- United States - $558.335,00
- Union State - $77.129,39
- China - $68.099,48
- United Kingdom - $62.450,91
- Japan - $49.865,54
- France - $45.967,87
- Germany - $39.120,16
- Italy - $32.036,87
- Saudi Arabia -$31.558,12
- India - $26.395,00