WI : Russia Gets Part of The Italian Colonies In 1945 ?

[Rattenfänger von Memphis]

What if Russia had gained control of Tripolitania in Libya in 1945, with United Nations approval, for at least 10 years ? Or perhaps longer ?

What could they have done with it ? Make it a showcase of a well-run, Communist-aided-and-advised nation, an example of benevolent, specifically non-colonial, Russian support to an African continent in which there were only 3 independent nations (Liberia, Egypt and Ethiopia) in 1945 ? (There would be no more independent African nations until almost 1952 unless you count South Africa in 1948 or so. Some sources say 1910 or 1934 for South Africa…)

Or would Tripolitania have been like West Berlin, isolated, deep in and surrounded by unfriendly territory that could easily be blockaded ? Or could it have been like Cuba, a major headache for mischief for the Western allies during the Cold War? How ?

Here is some background on how Russia might have gotten control of Tripolitania.

After World War II, the United Nations (actually the Big Five (USA, Britain, France, China and the USSR AKA Russia or the Soviet Union) had to decide the future fate of the Italian colonies, one of which was Libya.

As a result of wartime conquest, two of Libya’s regions, Cyrenaica and Tripolitania, were under British rule. The third region, the Fezzan, was administered by the French.
This Wikipedia article has a map of Tripolitania in relation to Libya: Libya Map

The initial decision was should Libya’s provinces be ruled by an individual, joint or collective administration called a trusteeship.
The Russians caused a stir in 1945 when they announced that Russia wanted Tripolitania in Libya as its share of the spoils.

“The Soviet Union has formally advised the Big Five Council of Foreign Ministers that it considers that the former Italian domain of Tripolitania should be administered under an individual trusteeship for the United Nations organization and that the U.S.S.R. would like to assume that role.

The British are worried about collective trusteeships, because they would put Russia into the Mediterranean. Now the individual trusteeship plan is equally disturbing to them because of Soviet interest in Tripolitania and Eritrea as well as possibly, in the future, the Dodecanese….With such acquisitions the Soviet would be established along Britain’s “lifeline”……. (September 19, 1945, page 1 and 2 excerpts)

The Russian justification for why they deserved Tripolitania was explained in Geoffrey Roberts’ book “Stalin’s Wars: From World War To Cold War, 1939 – 1953” on page 2 of Chapter 10 :

…. “The Soviet Government considered the future of Tripolitania as of primary importance to the Soviet people and they must press their request to assume the trusteeship of that territory. The Soviet government claimed the right to active participation in the disposal of the Italian colonies because Italy had attacked, and had inflicted enormous damage upon, the Soviet Union. … The territory of the Soviet Union was vast, stretching from the extreme east far into the west. It had a sea outlet in the north; it must also have use of ports in the south, especially since it now had the right to use Darien and Port Arthur in the Far East…Britain should not hold a monopoly of communications in the Mediterranean for her merchant fleet. World trade would develop and the Soviet Union wished to share in it…the Soviet Government possessed wide experience in establishing friendly relations between various nationalities and was anxious to use that experience in Tripolitania. They would not propose to introduce the Soviet system in Tripolitania. They would take steps to promote a system of democratic government.”.

In any event, the Russians did not get Tripolitania. Here is what actually happened in OTL

“Between 1945 and 1947 the Soviet Union made various proposals that Tripolitania be placed under Soviet trusteeship for ten years, or a joint trusteeship with the United Kingdom and the United States, or that Libya as a whole become an Italian trusteeship.”

“Although Britain and France intended on dividing the nation between their empires, on November 21, 1949, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution stating that Libya should become independent before January 1, 1952. On December 24, 1951, Libya declared its independence as the United Kingdom of Libya, a constitutional and hereditary monarchy.”

But remember if the Russians had gotten a trusteeship over Tripolitania in 1945, it was mostly a desert with under one million in population. Their rule probably would have lasted at the most for about 10 years or else the Russians could have been smeared as another colonial power. (In another example, they withdrew their armed forces from their occupation zone in East Austria in 1955, along with the Western allies).

The Arab League did not want the Russians or any European nation to have a trusteeship over Tripolitania. The fabulous Libyan oil wells would not be discovered until the late 1950s. Tripolitania only shared borders with Tunisia and the other two Libyan regions.

So what benefit could Tripolitania have been to Russia? Or would this adventure have only been an expensive mistake for them ?

 

[Catspoke]

Would the Soviets push their atheism and socialism on the people, seems like that could go badly.

 

[Monk78]

Would the Soviets push their atheism and socialism on the people, seems like that could go badly.

Socialism no but atheism yes

 

[Lusitania]

This would go contrary to what the two super powers preached and pressured the colonial powers to do and that was decolonization. How could Soviet attack the very institution it was practicing?

 

[Avrorrange]

This would go contrary to what the two super powers preached and pressured the colonial powers to do and that was decolonization. How could Soviet attack the very institution it was practicing?

Even the US did trusteeship.There’s a difference between trusteeship and a colony.Trusteeship is understood to be a very temporary thing.

 

[Quintuplicate]

Even the US did trusteeship.There’s a difference between trusteeship and a colony.Trusteeship is understood to be a very temporary thing.

Because they had actually fought for that land.

 

[Lusitania]

Even the US did trusteeship.There’s a difference between trusteeship and a colony.Trusteeship is understood to be a very temporary thing.

There was no Soviet liberation of any colonial country. Plus when America liberated an area it was restored to its rightful people and they established their own government. The Do keys as can be attested by the grateful people of such countries as Korea north of 38 parallel, Poland and other “liberated” countries ended up being defacto colonies of Soviet.

 

[The Tai-Pan]

It is hard to imagine the US and UK allowing Soviets footholds in Africa. Eastern Europe or the Far East were one thing. Russian boots on the ground were impossible to reverse but randomly inviting them into delicate areas far afield? Empires don't do such things if they can avoid it.

 

[Avrorrange]

There was no Soviet liberation of any colonial country. Plus when America liberated an area it was restored to its rightful people and they established their own government. The Do keys as can be attested by the grateful people of such countries as Korea north of 38 parallel, Poland and other “liberated” countries ended up being defacto colonies of Soviet.

The US actually put the Japanese colonies in the Pacific under US trusteeship.Most of which became associated states of the US or in the case of Northern Marianas, annexed by the it.So the argument is there that the two superpowers wouldn’t see is as hypocritical to have trusteeships.I would say that Czechslovakia and Poland should be considered German colonies ’liberated’ by the USSR.

 

[Lusitania]

The US actually put the Japanese colonies in the Pacific under US trusteeship.Most of which became associated states of the US or in the case of Northern Marianas, annexed by the it.So the argument is there that the two superpowers wouldn’t see is as hypocritical to have trusteeships.I would say that Czechslovakia and Poland should be considered German colonies ’liberated’ by the USSR.

The big difference was that these islands could declare independence from US at any time and when the Soviet’s arrive they like a bad house guest who never leaves and takes over your house. In addition with Poland they stole half the house.