On that note, the divide between the Bulgarian Communists and the non-Communists within said Fatherland Front (Zveno/Agrarians/Broad Socialists) could be seen as an equivalent to the divide between EDES and ELAS in Greece, if we want to add to the parallels.
Of lost monkeys and broken vehicles
- Thread starter Lascaris
- Start date
Hey someone has to take a fall as they're not going to win against the Soviets in the East and the Greeks/Americans in the West, and the British/Americans in the south.
It's more about Turkey winning the peace or not and how much land they'd lose. And boy they'd lose quite a lot especially to the Soviets.
I think the Turks that were stuck on the wrong side of the border would be forced back to Turkey.
But I agree that the Balkans would be messy post war and Greece would have their hands full dealing with the rest. I'd be surprised if Yugoslavia doesn't get split between Serbia and Croatia, and the fact that Albania and Bulgaria would need incentives to be pro Greece at the very least would make Greece's position very promising but also very precarious at first.
Yeah I defo see Greece handling a lot of the Balkans with the Americans sending a lot of the supplies for the war. I see them keeping some armies in the Balkans like their Italian and Anatolian armies but I don't see them sending new ppl there too.
Jeez, I hope that there'd be a monument built for the dead, and some of the destroyed buildings would be kept so the world would remember what happened there.
I really wonder what'll happen to the Armenians ittl. I have no doubt that they would be having a hard time post WWII repopulating the area. A lot of Russians would be in the area, and I don't see them using Armenian unless forced to, which may make integration of Russians hard, and the fact that they're separated from the motherland by Armenian majority areas makes it hard for them to see themselves as part of the Armenian SSR.
Hmm that's interesting, a civil war in Bulgaria would be interesting especially if Wallachia is capitalist.
Well, the goal of those in power in Turkey (mostly the Marshal Çakmak) is to preserve the army, not to preserve land.
Which, well preserving the Turkish Armed Forces and General Staff as is may or may not be possible (that is the success or failure for Turkey rn) but I do believe there will be a significant Turkish military post-war no matter what Greece wants.
If Turkey is pro-Soviet it will be on the border with NATO which will see it have a large if not necessarily powerful military along the lines of East Germany or North Korea.
If Turkey is neutral then it has a border with the USSR which is always dangerous so something like the Finnish or Swedish military is to be expected.
If Turkey is pro-Western then the reasons to build the Bundeswehr/JSDF apply to Turkey just as much as they did to West Germany and Japan.
Last edited:
Yeah I agree with the sentiment. I think Turkey losing the lands they'll be losing means they'd have less men and resources to fight by themselves especially if their allies are being pressured in Poland tho.
And the fact that the Turks don't control the straits means they lose leverage in general too.
I don't see Turkey being neutral tho, they're in the position of being too important to be neutral and too weak to enforce it. From all the different indicators we've got I think turkey would be nominally pro Soviet too, which would be interesting. The Soviets supporting turkey in the issue of Cyprus would make the crisis a lot more tense for example.
Losing land does not mean losing people. People move or are moved , especially in this part of the world.
All the historically neutral countries are too weak to enforce it (even Switzerland). Neutrality is always a decision of major powers.
tbf you can't fit a lot of ppl in a small amount of land tho, especially in places like ittl turkey where the places where ppl congregate are less than otl turkey.
My dear fellow, Singapore and the Netherlands would like to disagree (hell add Psara in 1820 to that). What small amount of land? Even assuming the worse territorial result for turkey, the distance from Afyon to Erzican is 760km and from Sinop to Anamur another 677km. That makes rump Turkey as big as modern continental Greece plus North Machedonya plus Serbia up to Nis. So not exactly small.
Last edited:
Or Bangladesh for that matter (even though Bangladesh's circumstances are rather unique).
Indeed. A country roughly the size of modern Greece and with 15 times the population. A nationalist Greeks wet dream
see one does not need land to have a world class population. Just accepting some levels of poverty.Two weeks ago I probably would have agreed with you. And I’m sure some will move voluntarily or be “encouraged” to leave. But land with no people is useless. And Greece doesn’t have a ton of people that could fill that empty land. Plus I don’t think the western allies what to deal with the optics of forcibly marching hundred of thousands of people out of their homes after the Holocaust starts hitting the airwaves. At least if it was a population exchange it wouldn’t seem as brutal, but the Turks don’t really have anyone left to trade unless I’m missing some group. So I think Greece is going to have some kind of Turkish minority after the war.
This is exactly what I had in mind when I said that.
I wonder if Armenia might become the place the Soviets dump some undesirables instead of Kazakhstan or Siberia. It’s not in the middle of nowhere which is a point against it but it will be relatively empty
If you let Turkey keep the army I feel like you’ve got to give Greece whatever defensive borders they want. That’s the counter balance. I’m not saying unlimited land grab but it’s definitely going to be whatever the Greek military planners agree on as the best defensive set up.
I’m not sold on them being Pro Soviet. TTLs Marshall plan can change just as many opinion and make just as many friends as the OTL one. Turkey will likely be a major target.
The Georgian and Armenian SSRs are especially going to be happy, Armenia especially.
Would like to see how the Armenian national conscious gets impacted after the war when much of Wilsonian Armenia (and some other territories) is given to Armenia. After several decades of living through the worst catastrophe in their history, this would provide much-needed relief and schadenfreude.
Considering that 1914 Russians victory plans envisioned no Armenian state and only limited cultural rights I would not bet on the Russians giving the Armenians much in reality. They can give them Ararat and Van but keep everything else as a Russian dominated Anatolia SSR.
I'm basing things off of this of course. Also 1914 was some time ago so things can change now. Plus I'm not saying Armenia will be independent, just that the Armenian SSR will be expanded. They will be generous to it as an excuse to take territory from Turkey just like they forced Germany to cede lands to Poland as an excuse to weaken Germany.
Here is the thing. In OTL 1945 the Soviets had to justify their land grab on something as Turkey was neutral. In ATL 1945 they do not need any justification. Turkey attacked them. They do not need the Armenians. I am sure they will push for Van and Ararat going to the Arnenuan SSR, but there it makes sense vs. Kurdish claims. But in East Anatolia? Right of the Victor.I'm basing things off of this of course. Also 1914 was some time ago so things can change now. Plus I'm not saying Armenia will be independent, just that the Armenian SSR will be expanded. They will be generous to it as an excuse to take territory from Turkey just like they forced Germany to cede lands to Poland as an excuse to weaken Germany.
I'd argue that using the Armenians would prove further legitimacy for the Soviets by claiming that they have humanitarian interests in mind in case anyone gets worried about the Soviets (not like their fears will be assuaged). Also they can also force Armenians to settle there just like they made Poles and other groups resettle in Eastern Europe to boost their claims.
Kurdistan will be established so the Armenian SSR definitely won't get all of what it wants but it could easily be compensated by other eastern Anatolian territories. Also, ethnic Russians have been settled in other SSRs and it didn't mean those territories were directly part of the Russian SSR. So I do see ethnic Russians settling into the new Armenia but the new territories will still be part of Armenia nonetheless. The only exception I can think of is that there'll be a Kaliningrad-like exclave somewhere in Anatolia.
I don't know. I insist that the more logical move fir the Soviets is to set up a maritime Black Sea SSR linking Crimea to their Anatolian possessions.
And adding to this, the only sizable minority left in much of the Pontus are the Laz, who are basically Muslim Georgians. And since the USSR practices state atheism, it wouldn’t be that far-fetched for the USSR to declare language matters more than the “opium of the masses” and thus give over the Pontus to the Georgian SSR on these grounds.
Georgia and Armenia have been wanting land and not even Stalin can deny them it. Stalin is Georgian so he would have an interest in expanding Georgia.