Of lost monkeys and broken vehicles
- Thread starter Lascaris
- Start date
As long she's not arrested for espionage and remains under the radar yes.
Last edited:
Thank you! I have fun making them when the mood takes me! For this it kinda feels like there's a group of British and Greek diplomats sitting in my head drawing lines, with one guy drunk in corner pounding the table shouting: "Megali! Megali, Megali, Megali!" Being slowly calmed down and walked back as the thread goes on and I get a better understanding of the region and time-period.
Speaking of, since it seems that people aren't tired of my many maps, let me throw out a few more proposals to the diplomats of the western allies based on a few points @Lascaris has raised...
You did mention that the Greeks had landed in Bodrum for 'political' reasons a couple chapters ago so the Greeks must want something in Caria at least. So logically if they're going for Halicarnassus it would make sense to connect it with the rest of Asiatic Greece and establish a reasonably defensible border around such annexations and extend around defensible terrain. Rather than just grabbing an indefensible enclave?
Most of the regions I highlighted (outside of the dark blue areas anyway) are rather mountainous, hilly, or heavily forested even in the modern day. I'd imagine they'd be even more sparsely populated 80-90 years ago. Taking some/any of it would add at least a bit of strategic depth against a country that has attacked them three times now in almost as many decades. After all, Greece here doesn't know that NATO will come around and stay around, they don't know about the Manhattan project and MAD doctrine doesn't exist yet. In my mind it'd be worth pushing that border south and east instead of counting on the US not to go into isolation again.
(I'm American and still kinda annoyed we didn't join the LON.)
From what I understand, Greece has already achieved... all of it's goals from 1919? Northern Epirus, Thrace, the Smyrna district... what are they missing? Besides Constantinople obviously.
I will point out, that regardless of the human cost, the allies (even the western allies) weren't exactly shy about rearranging the borders after the war. France even got some border adjustments off of Italy, which is what I'm kinda justifying the smaller border adjustments with Bulgaria and Albania on, France has been attacked by Italy much less than Greece has been attacked by Bulgaria after all.
As for areas of annexations...
According to these numbers, expansion in the south from areas with any Greeks would mean somewhere around 300,000ish people being displaced depending on how the line is drawn and if the Greek government goes ahead with expulsion of whoever didn't already flee. Compared to the German numbers of 12-14.6 million displaced I don't think that's an exceptionally high number at the expense of of a country that has fought the allies through two world wars and fought the Greeks in the Balkan wars before that.
Albeit I'm not counting... whatever the Soviets might do with whatever they might annex.
But can the foreign office tell the colonial office to pound sand yet? Churchill was in favor of giving it to Greece if I remember right wasn't he? But he lost the 1945 election iotl...
Regardless, below are a few possibilities! In all of them, I expanded Kurdistan based on:
Also weren't the Assyrians the primary reason that Mosul ended up as part of Iraq in the first place? Full circle! A smaller 'Assyria' remains in blue even if I think they'll likely remain as part of Iraq in some capacity, at least for a while. Soviet Georgia's expansion is also a little bit lessened but I really don't know what could happen there. Although If they reached Trebizond are they inclined to leave?
I also returned the rest of Cannakale to the international mandate to spare the Soviet's feelings.
Map A:
'Minimalist Greece'- The only notable expansion is to include the Northern part of former Italian Caria and the Dodeccanese. Otherwise no changes at all to the Greek border. It's also the one I like the least considering that abomination of a border with Albania. Includes a land connection to Halicarnassus.
Map B:
'Minor Gains Greece'
Same partial annexation of Caria, plus slight border adjustments in Albania and Bulgaria- Mountains, forests, and hills. The biggest change here is a slight expansion of Greece's 'panhandle' based on some discussion I saw about the Pomaks. Only a slight change to the border in Northern Asiatic Greece. The Albanian border looks better.
Map C:
'Worth giving up the city, Greece'
Includes the 'most' territorial gains of the three, but still less than the maximum of my claims map. Includes the whole Caria mandate as well as slightly more expansion in northern Asiatic Greece. Including Myra/Demre-Saint Nick can come home from his Italian vacation. This would also allow Turkish waters to be rather restricted if one throws Cyprus into the considerations.
It does exclude the Turkish population centers in Denizili as well (from what I can tell anyway, Google maps is a bit difficult to line up...).
It's also my favorite of the three.
....This post kinda ballooned again. Sorry about that.
And on that note, the Arrow Cross Party and the Government of National Unity could make a good equivalent to any Iron Guard regime the Germans could install if the events in Turkey lead to the Nazis keeping a closer eye on their minor allies and any disloyalty they have.
I like map A the most because means more stable territory with proportionally more greeks and less expelled Turks.
Tbf I could see them taking more from Bulgaria but otherwise yeah I think it works.
Tbf considering how much Germans got ethnically cleansed unless the Greeks annex anything from the Marmara region it wouldn't be that serious.
Map B but add Cyprus and that's what I think would make aesthetic sense (otherwise I'd go with that + Constantinople and - Cyprus for legit political reasons)..... if it was my choice to decide I mean P;
Last edited:
What's the status of Marmara Island and Prince's Islands here? (latter is light blue I assume)
Map B is my favourite, with the addition that Cyprus gets increased autonomy and that in 5-10 years it can join Greece, with the British retaining a large base in Akrotiri (but not in Dhekelia) .Map A:
'Minimalist Greece'- The only notable expansion is to include the Northern part of former Italian Caria and the Dodeccanese. Otherwise no changes at all to the Greek border. It's also the one I like the least considering that abomination of a border with Albania. Includes a land connection to Halicarnassus.
Map B:
'Minor Gains Greece'
Same partial annexation of Caria, plus slight border adjustments in Albania and Bulgaria- Mountains, forests, and hills. The biggest change here is a slight expansion of Greece's 'panhandle' based on some discussion I saw about the Pomaks. Only a slight change to the border in Northern Asiatic Greece. The Albanian border looks better.
Map C:
'Worth giving up the city, Greece'
Includes the 'most' territorial gains of the three, but still less than the maximum of my claims map. Includes the whole Caria mandate as well as slightly more expansion in northern Asiatic Greece. Including Myra/Demre-Saint Nick can come home from his Italian vacation. This would also allow Turkish waters to be rather restricted if one throws Cyprus into the considerations.
It does exclude the Turkish population centers in Denizili as well (from what I can tell anyway, Google maps is a bit difficult to line up...).
First of all is that really the current Greco-Albanian border ITTL? I was gonna eat breakfast but after seeing that choice piece of border gore I’m sick to my stomach lmao. So yeah I definitely appreciate what you did there.
Of your three maps (all of which I really appreciate by the way), C seems the most balanced between the Greek desire for culturally important areas with preexisting greek populations and the general desire to not conduct large scale ethnic cleansing on the Turks. Even if those Greek populations are small. That being said I think the Greeks are likely to try something like the map in your last post. Possibly something that has even a bit more land inland in central Anatolia to try and get a more defensible border. Not that they’ll necessarily get it. But I could definitely see them pushing for it.
I do agree that I find it unlikely that the Soviets would leave once they get somewhere, at least based of their behavior in OTL. I think they’ll inevitably be disappointed about Canakkale though. They may get a lot but nobody gets everything they want in a peace deal. They may get a base in the area but I do think the majority of the area inevitably ends up in Greek hands.
As for your Bulgarian border, it looks great but it might be messier (and possibly bigger) in reality. Since I don’t know of any religious demographic maps for the 1940’s, earlier maps are often highly biased, and the Soviets didn’t make such things for obvious reasons I feel like modern maps plus the two Pomak Republics might be our best bet to figure out what areas are majority Pomak. For easy reference I’ll link a Wikipedia map of each.
File:Bulgaria religous map by municipalities.png - Wikimedia Commons
File:Tamrashka republika en.png - Wikimedia Commons
While you do get a lot of the Southern Pomaks you also leave some out, particularly those based around the old Republic of Tamash. Sure it sticks out in a not aesthetically pleasing way but I feel like it would absolutely be part of any attempt by Greece to claim the Pomaks as their own. That irreligious area is also probably at least partially Pomak in the 40’s since it was before they were targeted by the Soviets. I love the maps again but I figured I’d give you something to think about.
Edit: Spelling
Last edited:
I still do not think Kurdistan will extend too much veyond the fertile lowlands. Which raises a big question about its future as land reform will be a big issue, and will be the basis of the foundation of a ATL pro Soviet PKK.
Would seem that TTL the Greek Thrace would be roughly have the same extension than OTL... So, Adrianople/Edirne will be located inside of ITTL Greek Thrace? Or it still would remain out of the new border?
From Lascaris' map Marmara Island is already Greek and the Princes' Islands are too small to be mapped here, but I assume they'd be part of the mandate.
I had tweaked the border line at some point but yes.
C is definitely the one I like the most, though even there I tried to scale it back from the full extent of the claims map from the most densely populated areas.
This was the post-ww1 map that Lascaris had provided way back in part 16.
Compared to the treaty of Sevres Greece had actually walked away with quite a bit more in Asia minor than they were initially promised. Which is also what I aligned a lot of the new borders on.The Near East after the end of World War 1, March 1922
While I didn't mention it in my main post, part of what I'm basing Greek expansion on are what I understand were OTL Greek border claims in southern Albania and border adjustments from Bulgaria, just scaled up to reflect what Greece already has, and the fact that they're both an unoccupied allied power and have much more sway than they did otl.
I will also point out that the Netherlands tried in otl to claim vast swaths of northern Germany with intent to give all the locals the boot. It failed because there were already waaaay to many refugees in the British and American occupation zones from the eastern annexations to handle more mass expulsions, that they would have to deal with and provide for. Plus the beginnings of a desire for some sort of west-Germany in the cold-war. Which is not the case with Turkey for a few reasons, not least because the allies wouldn't have to foot the bill for them.
I just think that if the Dutch were willing to push for this. Then an ascendant unoccupied Greece would very well claim a great deal, and get a good amount from the allies in exchange for letting Constantinople go. Which they did try to annex when the war kicked off.
Last edited:
Serpent
Banned
Eastern Thrace has been a Greek territory since 1920... since the signing of the treaty of Sevres...
Been some years since reading Ihrig, but arguably yes. The German nationalist press was all over the Turkish nationalist movement from very early on, when it was losing arguing fighting and losing was preferable to not fighting. Post that yes Turkey did not win outright in 1919-21 TTL but secured several important concessions, and removed foreign influence within the country, while destroying Armenia in the east and stopping any idea of Kurdish independence.
That's an effect of Tehran. The Greeks believe that they don't have any chance to get any territory they don't actually occupy at the time of the armistice. Thus are grabbing the territory in the coast that they had actually demanded in 1919. They may or may not be correct in this, but post Tehrean and Roosevelt and Churchill's visit in Athens there are... lets say way less trusting than they would have been otherwise.
A lot of them for certain. Improving the border after the experiences of 1941 is of course desirable but it is not that aside of Constantinople, the Dodecanese and Cyprus there are any great bodies of Greek population beyond Athens control.
No border adjustments with Albania. Besides perhaps Sazan island. With Bulgaria the Americans were not supportive of border adjustments OTL. It remains to be seen TTL.
That depends. Frex in OTL the Colonial office was using the Greek civil war as an excuse. TTL its no big spoiler to say a Greek civil war is entirely unlikely.
The bad question for the Assyrians is if Abdullah is forced to accept the loss of Iraqi Kurdistan... can he afford any concessions at all to the Assyrians? Who are hated by his new Iraqi subjects, hence any concessions would be affecting his hold on the throne?
The Turkish population affected might uhm... disagree?
The former is Greek territory since 1921. The latter would be part of Constantinople. And given being 94% Greek would likely fall with the Western zone.
the maps out of necessity use modern Albanian districts. Of which to copy from my raw notes, North Epirus is the following
| North Epirus | km2 |
| Devoli | 453 |
| Kolonia | 846 |
| Korytsa | 1752 |
| Argyrokastro | 1137 |
| Delvine | 348 |
| Saranta | 749 |
| Himara | 572 |
The ---- line on this map (second from north) is pretty close to the actual border it is what France and Britain were proposing in 1920. Although I almost went with the third which was the American proposals.
A bit or more than a bit would depend on what Greek populations you get outside Greece or Western zones as well about you'd see Circassians and some Pontic Muslims including in a potential population exchange.
There would be some irony in Greece holding Troy... but I won't provide spoilers.
The obvious question is if you get say 100,000 Bulgarian Muslims in the region how many would be Pomaks and how many would not.
Following the Arda river as the new border makes some sense IMO... assuming the border is changed. Minimum Greek claims were about 2,000 km2 in 1946.
Euphrates as the border? Or you could organize plebiscites...
It is part of Greece since the treaty of Sevres in 1920...
It has. Continuing the war after Sevres... had a cost. In effect the Greeks got most of their 1919 claims, outside Italian control.
So did the Belgians and then the French wanted Saar. All three were not in a position to press for it. Now notably the French at least TTL are in at least a somewhat better position than OTL. Could that affect the fate of Saar? And if it did how it would had affected German-French relations?