Hyper-centralized, Warsaw Pact-style NATO - is that an ASB?

[Kammada]

Just what it says on the tin.

Let's suppose that the U.S. have managed to impose their will to the whole of NATO, much like the Soviets have done with their Warsaw Pact. Basically it means that
a) the membership in the NATO is neither negotiable nor can be limited à la De Gaulle - Uncle Sam wants you and that's the end to the debates;
b) the U.S. don't have to negotiate their base rights - they are just present wherever they want; they don't allow the member nations to independently develop nuclear weapons either;
c) they are controlling to some extent the members' interior affairs. Not totally - this is really an ASB -, but, say, like the Soviets in the Cold War era Finland;
d) they are ready to mount an armed intervention of the kind of Soviet ones in Hungary and Czechoslovakia.

How much of this is pure ASB and what of the rest could be a possibility, however remote? What consequences would that have, except that the world would have become a much nastier place to live than IOTL?

 

[CivisOccidensSum]

How much of this is pure ASB and what of the rest could be a possibility, however remote?

How much is ASB? All of it. Because the entire premise of this, is that the US is the same kind of state that USSR was (except for the "communist" part). However much some people might talk about "the American Empire", it's BS. For this to happen, you'd need a POD that turns American ideals away from "freedom", "democracy", "self-determination" etc, to their opposites. That means you'd have a WAAAAYYY different America, and it is more likely than not, that it'd butterfly away American involvement in the world wars altogether.

If I were the paranoid type, I'd say that this seems more like a "America are a stupid!"-troll post than anything else...

 

[Blackfox5]

You are basically saying what if the US turned all NATO states into satellites. That isn't possible. You'd have to create a completely different US that didn't believe in democracy which would butterfly away most of the last two centuries of history.

 

[Kammada]

Nice to hear that, thanks. An idea of our planet being partaged by two equally evil and self-righteous empires that tolerate no dissent is rather unnerving, don't you think?

 

[Minchandre]

I guess something like this might be possible-ish if people are really scared of the Soviets - and remember, people were plenty scared of them IOTL. I can't think of anything that would scare the European nations enough to let the US dominate them like that and wouldn't actually start a war - maybe if Russia brutally invades and/or nukes Communist China, but that's about it.

 

[Damu]

What if WW2 takes a different course? Say with France, the Benelux and Denmark not surrendering but fighting to the bitter end, with widespread guerrila movements, with Britain sending everything it has in northern France in 1940 (don't know if they had that much else to send really). This way, the brutal devastating war that happened on the Eastern front happens in the West, leaving much of Western Europe as devastated as Belarus, Poland and Ukraine were? This way after the war ends, Western European NATO allies would be weaker than they were in OTL, the Soviet Union probably stronger, and therefore they would surrender some of their sovereignty to the US in exchange for a larger US commitment in Europe.

Thoughts?

 

[Riain]

The problem I see is that NATO included some very recent great powers who had considerable military strength in their own right once they got back onto their feet. This is the big difference between NATO and WP, eastern Europe has no analogue to Britain, France, Italy and Germany in industrial power terms. As such it would be difficult if not impossible for the US to impose its will onto such great powers. Another factor is that the US is separated by the atlantic and would never be able to loom over its allies the way the Soviets did. They could move a couple of armies around their own homeland as a way of threatening recalcitrant allies, moving a carrier isn`t quite the same.

 

[CivisOccidensSum]

What if WW2 takes a different course? Say with France, the Benelux and Denmark not surrendering but fighting to the bitter end, with widespread guerrila movements, with Britain sending everything it has in northern France in 1940 (don't know if they had that much else to send really). This way, the brutal devastating war that happened on the Eastern front happens in the West, leaving much of Western Europe as devastated as Belarus, Poland and Ukraine were? This way after the war ends, Western European NATO allies would be weaker than they were in OTL, the Soviet Union probably stronger, and therefore they would surrender some of their sovereignty to the US in exchange for a larger US commitment in Europe.

Thoughts?

Well....you'd still need to have a RADICALLY different US to have this kind of Empire that the OP's suggesting...

 

[EWHM]

Seems like you could get there with a continuation of WWII, perhaps in the late 40s or early 50s. The USSR would have to be a lot more expansionist than OTL.

 

[Blackfox5]

What if WW2 takes a different course? Say with France, the Benelux and Denmark not surrendering but fighting to the bitter end, with widespread guerrila movements, with Britain sending everything it has in northern France in 1940 (don't know if they had that much else to send really). This way, the brutal devastating war that happened on the Eastern front happens in the West, leaving much of Western Europe as devastated as Belarus, Poland and Ukraine were? This way after the war ends, Western European NATO allies would be weaker than they were in OTL, the Soviet Union probably stronger, and therefore they would surrender some of their sovereignty to the US in exchange for a larger US commitment in Europe.

Thoughts?

No, it still wouldn't happen. Soviet domination of Eastern Europe didn't happen because those countries were devastated. It happened because the Soviets arrested anyone who imposed them and put into place people who would do Moscow's bidding with the support of the Red Army behind them.

All a devastated Western Europe would beget is additional US aide and perhaps a short period of US occupation until those countries could take over the reigns of government. The US is not going to rule France, Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, etc. with the barrel of a gun.

 

[Damu]

No, it still wouldn't happen. Soviet domination of Eastern Europe didn't happen because those countries were devastated. It happened because the Soviets arrested anyone who imposed them and put into place people who would do Moscow's bidding with the support of the Red Army behind them.

All a devastated Western Europe would beget is additional US aide and perhaps a short period of US occupation until those countries could take over the reigns of government. The US is not going to rule France, Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, etc. with the barrel of a gun.

Yes I know very well how Soviet domination of Eastern Europe was imposed, I wasn't comparing the two things. I was saying that maybe a much weaker, trully crippled, Western Europe, and a US that is in a much worse strategic position than OTL because of this, with a Soviet Union that has not gone through the devestations of the eastern front and is therefore stronger, might provoke NATO countries to accept complete US leadership.

Though, I guess there still needs to be a massive change in American internal politics... the OP's "d" point does seem impossible without this.

 

[Dalmighty]

You could hypothetically get all of continental asia and the middle-east under Communism and form a USS of Eurasia or TTL's equivalent of the Warsaw Pact.

Start of with worsening relations between the US and Britain, then delay the creation of atomic weapons by a few years.

Then during WW2, the Germans screw up faster, Turkey sides with the Axis, the Allies bomb Baku, WW2 extended ends with the lines in Germany, Egypt, India with the US staying away from the British-USSR conflict.
The joint invasion of Japan by the US and USSR ends with its partition.

Add a few successful communist revolutions in SEA, India, M.E, South America, Africa and you'll have a super - communist bloc. The US will be dis by separatists.

You'll probably need to kill Mao early so a Stalin supporter replaces him after the Chinese Civil War and get Russia and US to both nuke a few small countries during the Cold War.