Talk:New Union/Archive 2

Some more ideas... ура!
"UNICORNS AND GLITTER!!!"

Sorry, guess I am a little hyper at the moment. Anyway, here are a couple of ideas I would like to throw around and get some feedback on, because I personally am stumped on an answer.


 * Decline of NATO?: I have recently reconsidered the expansion of NATO for TTL, and have decided that the Soviets would not allow NATO to expand anymore east. I have come up with an even more interesting idea, what I call the, in which Poland and so on declare their neutrality between NATO and the CSTO, but agree on joint and equal cooperation. With that said and done, I have recently been thinking about France. I never knew this, but France has not been an active part of NATO since the 1960s. NATO forces in France no longer exist, but France continues to work as part of NATO. In fact, it has only been recently (i.e., the Civil War in Libya) that France has openly discussed reintegrating with NATO. Maybe with the USSR continuing to exist, and having friendly relations with the west, and France's importance with European Integration, maybe France would go in a completely different direction. Maybe France would drop their cards and completely leave NATO all together. It doesn't sound so far-fetched to me. Out of all the NATO nations, France has had the closest relations with the USSR during the later years of the Cold War (including French cosmonauts as part of the Intercosmos program). I also have been trying to reinterpret the EU in TTL. While EU membership is taken by Russia as being absolute relations with the west in OTL, the EU would be taken as a more neutral organization, which forms as a means to protect the sovereignty of Europe from the USSR and USA, and France would be a big part in this. Just as in OTL, the EU is growing and growing, possibly going to become a superpower in the following century, so I believe it would have to eventually move towards its own sphere. So in short, with the Cold War over, the end of the Iron Curtain, and the USSR working peacefully with the west, the French would reconsider their involvement in NATO. With Poland, Czechoslovakia, et al. forming what would become the "Neutral Bloc," France considered itself in a similar situation. In fact, France only left NATO command because it too wanted to protect its sovereignty (believing NATO was more in control by the US and UK, while France was on the bottom). In response to the Neutral Bloc, France would declare their secession from NATO, which wouldn't be so much of a problem since NATO forces haven't been in France in decades. France declare to establish equal cooperation with NATO and the USSR. Maybe Germany and other NATO members would follow suit, leaving only the US, UK, and the most loyal members left in NATO. Though still a major military bloc, it would not be as powerful as in OTL (while the Soviet bloc would also be just as loose). France (and maybe Germany, if they too decide to leave) would be the main players in the future of the EU, leading to the rise of "Europeanism," the idea that Europe should be in control of Europeans, not by the Americans or the Soviets. So ironically, the US would also loose their bloc in Europe.
 * Yugoslav Republic of Dardania: In TTL, I have already decided that the Yugoslav-Kosovar relations would be more peaceful. Though not brotherly, it would be peaceful enough to avoid war and the further collapse of Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia would elect Milo Đukanović as president in 1997 for is support of a Soviet-like system of sovereignty in Yugoslavia. Unlike Slobodan, Dukanovich (with great support from Gorbachev) would work to bring peace between the Slavic majority and the Albanian minority. In 2000, Kosovar President Ibrahim Rugova (just as in OTL) would propose the creation of "Dardania" (a historic name for Kosovo, used by Albanians in the region). But unlike OTL, this Dardania is larger. Rugova would propose a united republic between the "" (the Serbian controlled region that we all know as Kosovo), and the self proclaimed "Republic of Ilirida" (the Albanian regions in Macedonia). Ironically, Serbs would welcome the idea (primarily because it would keep the region within Yugoslavia, and because Serbia has already expanded to include Srpska), but the Macedonians would be a little bit peeved at the idea. After a minor crises in 2001, the Albanians of Macedonia request to become part of a greater Yugoslav-Albanian republic. In 2002, the Albanians gain their wish. The Republic of Dardania is formed with the unification of Kosova and Ilirida, and now the "Dardanians" gain full sovereignty and equality in Yugoslavia.

I would really appreciate some feedback, get some external opinions before I consider making any of this canon. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:40, April 7, 2011 (UTC)


 * The Dardania concept is a good one. I'm not so sure, mind about the French leaving NATO, however. They haven't left since the collapse of the USSR otl, and enjoy the little "security blanket" it offers them - i.e. they don't have to do anything, but get all the benefits anyways. Here, with the USSR still intact, though not so imperialistic or controlling, I kinda doubt that they would shed this. It's not like they normally listen to NATO anyways, lol. Maybe just have them pull their troops out of Germany like otl, and aid the Soviets in the third world somewhat? Lordganon 19:03, April 7, 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for your feedback, Lordganon. Now that I do think of it, it may be good for France to remain in NATO, but I think it should remain out of the command in any case. I still need to work out the kinks on Dardania, but glad to hear it sounds good.


 * I also came across an interesting find that might be interesting for Japan... maybe. I read that Gorbachev was planning on established better Soviet-Japanese relations, and one of the ways he wanted to do this was to bring and end and work out the . Gorbachev made it clear that the USSR would not hand over all the islands, but would be willing to discuss the Northern Territories (the southernmost islands that are closest to Japan). When the USSR collapsed, Yeltin's government was more defiant on loosing any of the islands, and more worried about internal affairs. Though I can't say how this would turn out, maybe the USSR would agree on the Japanese definition, or vise versa, but there was a proposal to only give the southern most and smallest islands back to Japan. It isn't a bad idea, after all, the USSR was than finalizing border disputes between neighboring China, so why not give Japan back these islands, and make better friends with Japan than the Russo-Japanese relations are now. Also, I came across an article which along with mentioning the visit, Japan offered aid to the Chernobyl tragedy. IRONY! --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 01:22, April 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, even Putin as recently as a few years ago offered the return of the two smallest southern ones in exchange for a permanent peace treaty, which the two have still not signed. By the sounds of that article, if you have the Soviet Union offer the southernmost 4 or so, in exchange for the treaty, the Japanese would do it. With Gorby wanting to work it out, I think that's reasonable. Lordganon 15:00, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. After doing some more reading, I am more eager to have the this work out. I read that Japan was one of the inspirations for perestroika. If Gorby (I love that, but I keep forgetting about it) was really willing to talk about it, I think it could work out in favor for both. Japan gets the Northern Territories (all four islands), in exchange that Japan not militarize the islands (similar to the USSR's position on the German Reunification), the rights of Soviet citizens living on the islands, and opening up aid and economic cooperation between the USSR and Japan. IMHO, I don't think loosing these islands would be as much of a big deal for Gorby, as he live in a nation that would be twice the size of Yeltin's Russia, and the backing of the republics. The USSR also gained portions of Moldova and Gerogia just prior to when this would be made official, and imagine the economic boom that the USSR and Japan (who at the time were both declining [the USSR more than Japan]). I will work it out a little, but I am happy to think about it. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:12, April 8, 2011 (UTC)

Just don't forget that the peace treaty would have to be part of the arrangement. Past that, sounds great. Lordganon 04:34, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Taiwan SAR?
A few weeks ago, an anonymous user created a page for. In the "OTL equivalent," it states that it was China and Taiwan. I don't know if it was a typo, their definition, or whether they had an idea they wanted to propose. I am not an expert on China, but I do know that there are Two Chinas. The People's Republic of China is the communist government for the mainland (which also includes Hong Kong and Macau as SARs), while Taiwan is governed by the democratic (and nationalist) Republic of China. I have been doing some quick reading on the aspect of Chinese reunification, and found out that the policy which would reunite Hong Kong and Macau with the mainland was called. The policy was made by Deng something (Chinese Gorby?), and was maid primarily for the reunification of the mainland and Taiwan. Though the policy would eventually reunite China and two cities, Taiwan is still separate. I read that this was due to more politicians supportive of independence (the formation of a "Republic of Taiwan"), rather than reunification.



But after doing some reading, I think that there could be a possibility that the OCTS could work out in favor of a full reunification of China. I was thinking of a double-edged sword, in which both sides cave in and lead to a (potentially) better atmosphere for both. Here's what I thought of:


 * Gorbachev's openness to its neighbors has begun to scare some people in the PRC. In only a matter of years, the USSR has reopened relations with Japan (by giving back the northern territories), and has established relations with South Korea (a nation which it did not recognize just years earlier). There was growing fear that Gorbachev may try to establish relations with the Republic of China. Though many nations recognize the ROC, the fact that the USSR would made many fear that this would lead to a shift in the region, and would cause the USSR to potentially support Taiwanese independence. Because of this, the PRC would be more determined to reunite the two Chinas, even if it means loosening the proposed polices to do this (i.e., more autonomy for Taiwan?).
 * On the other side of the strait, the reforms of the USSR into a union of sovereign states has spread across Taiwan. Though there would still be a divide, more and more Taiwanese show interest in reunification. The idea would be loved more when the PRC offers changes to its original proposal, which would be somewhat more beneficial for Taiwan.

Some point prior to 1996, the reunification of Taiwan and the mainland would take place. Later, Hong Kong and Macau would become part of the PRC, completing the reunification. Just like OTL HK, Taiwan would gain autonomy (if not more that OTL). The TWD would remain the currency on the island, and capitalism would remain on the island. Taiwan would retain a separate internet sever from the mainland (just as HK and Macau), which would lead to controversy today as Google would work there instead of the mainland. Though the mainland would like to keep it secret, the aspects of Taiwanese independence continues to exist on Taiwan, and would also have support from several in HK and Macau. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:27, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

A good idea in theory, but I have to kinda doubt it would happen unless China reformed its government to be like your USSR did here. Even then, it would probably just stay independent, but with a much more pro-reunification view than otl. Lordganon 01:15, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

Union of Balkania


I was just browsing through the Wikipedia and I dug up an article about a proposed state called "Balkania". It was the name of a proposed state for a reformation of Yugoslavia, It was suggested by a Albanian politician Adem Demaci. I've created a flag for a concept, I've used the Byzantine eagle as the symbol, and the four stars for the 4 republics. Vidboy10 21:20, April 10, 2011 (UTC)




 * Great minds think alike. I actually considered this idea before, but I believe this was too optimistic for Yugoslavia at the time. I decided that it would be better to incorporate the Balkania idea in a different way. The words of Demaci would become big news in Yugoslavia, and would lead to the rise in republican sovereignty in Yugoslavia, and the formation of Dardania. Similar to how Saharov's proposed constitution to the Soviet Union in 1989 was used in some reference for the New Union Treaty, I think the politicians would have to tweak it before it became true. But man, I am amazed you have heard about the idea too. Where did you find the flag? I had to go reading threw Serbian books in order to find even the description that Demaci proposed. Here's what I made a while ago, I can't believe how similar they are. Thank you for bringing this up, you made my day ^_^ --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 21:49, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

Libya
Ever since Libya broke out into civil war, it has turned this timeline upside down for me. It is hard to really figure out the situation for the region, because Libya was the biggest Middle Eastern ally of the USSR. Libya would be the first nation to recognize Russia as the successor state of the USSR in OTL, so I believe it would be one of the first to recognize the new government of the USSR.

It is both easy and hard to determine what will become of Libya. If anything, Libya would probably turn out to be just like Egypt. There was not foreign intervention in Egypt, primarily because it was a major US ally. Now with me reading the possibility that Libya may collapse into three or so new nations, it is now getting more confusing. So let me get my ducks in a row. Here's what I want for Libya, that would be possible for TTL.


 * Libya would not break down into several nations. If anything, it may turn out like the USSR, in which it is a federation of sovereign states. This would only be if Gadaffi leaves power. Otherwise, I see nothing against dividing the nation into several states.
 * The USSR would not allow foreign intervention in Libya. So no NATO-led invasion as OTL. However, the USSR would support sanctions against Libya, and would publicly denounce Gadaffi's actions against the Libyan people.
 * Many Libyan rebels would look towards both the USSR and the USA for assistance. While the USA would probably go completely in support for the rebels, the USSR would be more or less "neutral." In most cases, Medvedev and the USSR would be more supportive of a ceasefire rather than a complete victory of one side. The USSR (both politically and demographically) would be divided between pro-Gadaffi and pro-Rebel. Many in the USSR (especially the Islamic republics) would favor democracy for Libya. In fact, many Soviet citizens who remained in Libya would advocate Soviet support for the rebels, possibly with many volunteers from the USSR traveling to Libya (any way they could) to assist in the conflict. There would also be rumors that Medvedev and the Soviet government are aiding the rebels in Libya, though it has not been confirmed.

Still have a lot to work out, but either way, it will be interesting. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 14:25, April 21, 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry too much about the splitting of Libya just yet, nuke. While it may happen, I personally doubt it. However, it is out there, specifically because of the artificial nature of Libya - the ruler of Cyrenica was given the other thrones in the aftermath of WWII, against quite a few wishes. At most, Libya could go into Tripoliana and Cyrenica. At this point, though, its more so a question of how long things go on than who succeeds. Lordganon 15:44, April 21, 2011 (UTC)

New Republics of the Union
1) About republics of the USSR. Their number should grow much. At first, in 1990-s many ASSR of RSFSR wanted to be transformed in the Union republics, with all the ensuing economic benefits. All ASSR in their new constitutions, taken around 1991, named themselves SSR. This is first.

Some so called “Russian” regions of RSFSR would form SSR too. In August 1991 was formed Cossack republics in the Caucasus region: Batalpashinsk Cossack SSR and Zelenchuk-Urup Cossack SSR. 30 November Union of Cossack republics of southern Russia was proclaimed as Union republic in the New Union. This is second.

New wave of forming the SSR can started in the middle 1990-s. OTL economical troubles prompted some governors to try to equate their region on the status of a national republic (such as Anatoly Efremov and Pomor Republic proposal in Arkhangelsk or Eduard Rossel and Ural Republic proposal in Sverdlovsk) – to more easily manage the budget. In New Union TL this regions also can form SSR. This is third.

I think, that in NU TL such as in OTL economical troubles of 1990-s lead to the rebirth of the communist opposition. In OTL Russia during this times was term “the Red Belt” – regions, where the local power belonged to CPRF. In TTL, this regions also can try to form SSR – where socialist values will preserved and legitimized in constitutions in 1936-style. This is forth.

So, after all of the above, RSFSR in the New Union, I think, will totally disappear. And in the middle 2000-s same thing will be happen with Ukraine. The contradictions between the East and West, which OTL took the form of the struggle between Yushchenko, Tymoshenko and Yanukovich TTL can divide Ukraine into several parts, and Western Ukraine even can secede from the Union.


 * Здравствуйте, 2303. Haven't seen you in a while. Don't know why you made mention that Baltia was a failure, since I said you could work on it. Anyway, time to comment on several of these suggestions^_^

ASSRs like Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Chechnya, and a united Ossetia (just to name a few) would make excellent republics. ASSRs like Komi, Tuva, and Karelia would make bad republics, either because the Russians would rule them more than in other republics, or their population is too sparse. It was because of this that the Karelo-Finnic SSR was a short-lived republic. In many cases, I am sure many of the proclaimed SSRs would have settled for greater sovereignty in their autonomy within Russia, while the others would be welcomed as full republics.
 * The Cossacks declared their own republics? Is this backed by true accounts, or is this an idea you came up with. Either way, I am actually quite fascinated at the idea. If the Circassians can gain their own republic, I would be honored for the Cossacks to also gain a republic. But the question would be whether their republic would be feasible (see 2 below)
 * I am quite aware that pretty much every autonomous republic in the RSFSR (let alone the entire USSR). But the majority of these declarations of sovereignty would not have been feasible, and I believe many of them were only trying to send a message to Moscow. I read somewhere that the USSR has a "criteria" for what defines a SSR. But since it was never official or constitutionally used, I have been quite lenient on it. The three rules were: 1) A Union Republic must have a population no less than a million, to secure the republics militia and economy. I have been very lenient with this, lowering it down to be [more or less] 2/3 a million. 2) The titular peoples of the republic (the main ethnic group) must have a more or less majority in population. Pretty simple, and this rule I follow. 3) The proposed republic is not to be surrounded by other republics of the USSR, to help secure itself in the event of secession. This rule I find total BS, and I don't follow it at all. Both because this would prevent many republics (Tatarstan for one) from gaining republican status, but the idea of secession in any federation seems funny to me.
 * As for the self-proclaimed Republics like the Ural Republic, I feel they were created more out of equality from within the smaller Russian Federation. But just like OTL, I believe these proclaimed republics would not fair too well, and may only stand as a declaration for reforms within Russia itself.
 * As for the economic troubles, I believe they would be much less severe than OTL. In fact, with the USSR remaining in tacked, the standard of living would be much better for the republics during the 90s. Granted, it wouldn't be paradise, but it would be much better than OTL. So again, the ideas of creating more SSRs would not fair too well. I believe the communist party would still play an important role in the USSR. In fact, this "red belt" (which I have never heard about before, but I am going to read more about) may be bigger. But in the end, the USSR continues to be a multi-party state, not a single-party state.
 * As for the Ukraine splitting off, I would hope not and would like to avoid this. Just like for Yeltsin in TTL, his political views would be considered too "radical" in comparison to Gorbachev's reforms. I would believe that the Ukraine would never elect someone like Yushchenko or Tymoshenko, as they would also be considered too "radical." But yes, I have read several timelines where the Ukraine is split, bit I'd prefer to leave the Ukraine as a whole unless it becomes apparent that it would not work.


 * Hope this will help out. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:59, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1)Yes, but only Southern Cossaks. In Cossak Union would be 6 republiks:Batalpashinsk, Zelenchuk-Urup, Armavir, Upper Kuban, Don and Terek (with Sunzha region of Chechnya) all of them was proclaimed till 1991
 * 2) I meen just Tatarstan, Chechnya, Bashcortostan + Saha and Tuva, Chercessya and mb united Karachai-Balkaria
 * 4) In my mind, USSR was multy-party state since 1990.. (CPSU, Democratic Union, CRC, LDPSS...)
 * 5) And what do you think about Crimea?
 * 5) And what do you think about Crimea?

I am really, really interested in adding Cossackia. However, I can't find any links to back your claims. Do you have any links to the proposal, I would love to back the information up for myself. I have already made Yakutia (Sakha) as a republic, because its population is over 900,000, and has a close majority of Yakuts. As for Tuva, it has a good majority of Tuvans, but has a population smaller than Wyoming. Granted, I agree that Tuva should become a republic, but statistically it wouldn't be sound. As for the Crimea, if you are talking about republican status, I think not. Despite the fact that it was once home to the Crimean Tatars, the population is primarily Russian today. Only if all of the Ukraine were to leave the Union would I agree to allow the Crimea to become a republic. But as I mentioned before, I will not agree on splitting up the Ukraine unless it is completely justifiable for this timeline. Even if it were to be split up, the Crimea would be part of an "East Ukrainian State." I believe it gaining the status of autonomous republic (as in OTL) would suit the Crimeans just fine.

Also, thank you so much for the flags. I never saw them before. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 14:49, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

links about Cossakia? Please, at least http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%85%D0%BD%D1%8F%D1%8F_%D0%9A%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%8C - Верхняя Кубань from Russian Wikipedia.


 * Ooh la la! I am hooked already. Do you know of any maps of this proposed republic, or have any knowledge of their borders? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 17:07, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but only this variant (photo from Arthur Tsutsiev’s “Atlas of ethno-political history of the Caucasus”). Proposals of that times.
 * Sorry, but only this variant (photo from Arthur Tsutsiev’s “Atlas of ethno-political history of the Caucasus”). Proposals of that times.

1) Nogai autonomy proposal

2) Kabarda (separated from Balkaria) + part of Northen Ossetia

3) Balkaria (separated from Kabarda)

4) Karachay

5) Nothern Ossetia

6) Chechnya

7) Ingushetia (+ part of Nothern Ossetia)

8) Kumyk autonomy proposal

9) Lesser Dagestan (Avar- Dargin authonomy)

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">10) Lezgin autonomy proposal

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">11) Cossak Union proposal

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">12) Talish autonomy proposal

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">13) Borchalo Armenian autonomy proposal

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">14) Javakheti Azerbaijan autonomy proposal

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">15) Nagorny Karabah

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">16) Abkhazia

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">17) Southern Ossetia

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">18) Ajaria

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">19) Shapsug autonomy proposal

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">20) Circassian- Abaza autonomy proposal

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">21) Adygea

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 54pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">22) Nakhichevan



Wow, thank you so much for the map. It really helped me out. I guess you would call this dumb luck, but I found that same image online. Do you own the book and scanned it? (just curious) But anyway, I have gone threw the borders and ideas, and I think I came up with a border that I can agree with. Here;s what I have:


 * Cossaskia: The proposed border of Cossackia seems to be very bad IMHO. Granted, Kuban Republic still remains in the Krasnodar Krai, and the Don Republic remains in the Rostov Oblast. But the Terek region no longer exists, divided between Stavropol and the many republics in the south. I find that Cossackia gaining all lost territory is impossible, while only gaining such a small stretch of land back is just pointless. Since Rostov and Krasnodar are going to go to the Cossacks, why not just let them have Stavropol as well? History has shown (especially in the USSR) that regions have been moved to other republic, even though it may seem weird. Russia gave the Crimea to the Ukraine and gave its half of Karelia to help form the Karelo-Finnic SSR. So why not let the Cossacks have all of this Krai. I believe I can also justify this for the TL. The Cossacks also claimed regions in Chechnya and Dagestan. I believe this (in the first place) is a bad idea. With the Chechens threatening to declare independence, I think Gorbachev would want to "butter up" the Chechens, preventing war and a second collapse. I still believe Chechnya would be the first new republic to form out of Russia, so the republic itself would have had say in the Supreme Soviet. I dough they would have been willing to give up any part of their land to the Slavs. Though Dagestan wouldn't have been as resistant, I believe it should be left out. So perhaps Moscow would offer all of the Stavropol Krai, in exchange that they drop their claims in Chechnya and Dagestan.


 * Dagestan: I had no idea that the people of Dagestan wanted to divide the region. However, I believe this would not happen. Looking at the population of the many peoples, none of them hold enough to stabilize a new republic on their own. Here is a good example of where the saying "united we stand, divided we fall" applies outside the US. However, I see nothing wrong with these regions gaining autonomy. Maybe Dagestan would go the way as the Transcaucasus did in the early years of the USSR. Dagestan would become a "Federation of Dagestan;" with Kumykia, Lezgia, and Nogaistan becoming autonomous republic. The remaining portions (you call it "Lesser Dagestan") would not gain full autonomy, but would act as the main body within the Dagestani Federation. Azerbaijan may be willing to give over its Lezgi regions in exchange for the Azeri region within Dagestan, and since Stavropol is going to Cossackia, why not give the Nogai region to Nogaistan.


 * Circassia: I still believe there should be a Circassia in TTL. Granted, it would be smaller than my optimistic proposal, but there would still be one. I need to go threw and see what its population would be, but currently it could either become a full republic, or become an "Autonomous Federation" within Cossackia.


 * Karachay-Balkaria: I support the idea of a united Karachay-Balkaria. Do you have any idea if they intended to make a singular name for them as a united people?

Everything else is pretty much self explanatory. Ossetia agrees to hand over its northern regions in exchange to be united with the south, Kabardia would also agree to hand over its parts in the north. What do you think? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 22:30, April 27, 2011 (UTC)

1) About Circassia - I think, united republic can be only Union republic in USSR. Otherwise, why join?

2)Karachay-Balkaria. May be, such as Ossetia change this name to Alania, this republic would named "Kumania" (this people believe polovtsi (kumans) their ancestors.

3) Chechnya. United with Ingushetia only if there will be no Johar Dudayev, with his slogan Татары в Казань, русские в Рязань, ингуши в Назрань! I think new Checheno-Ingushetia can named Vainakhia - so that no one was hurt not.

4) Dagestan. You wariant is really possible. But I can not imagine, how it flag will look like? OTL flag is in reality flag of Russia,only white band, which including symbolizes Orthodoxy, changed to green - colour of Islam.




 * Thank you so much for your feedback. Vainakhia and Kumania? I have never heard those names, but I like them. I know North Ossetia wanted to name themselves Alania, but would the south be into that? Because in TTL, South Ossetia would have been admitted first, with the north being transferred from Russia to the south. Personally, I like the name "Ossetia" better than Alania. And if all these republics are going to be renamed, than that may leave open the possibility of Tatarstan renaming itself "Bulgaristan." Next, I have been rethinking the republics of the USSR. I may be willing to loosen the criteria even more. Here is a map I made to show my opinion of the republics of Russia:


 * Red republics I am firmly denying any republican status. Their populations are primarily Russian. These will remain autonomous republics within Russia (or such)
 * Yellow republics I may be open to allowing. They may have very low populations, but are primarily their titular peoples. Mari El has more Russians, but the divide is almost half. (Russians:47%; Mari:42%)
 * Light blue republics I am semi-open to. Their populations are primarily Russian, but the divide between the Russian population and the titular population is close enough for me.
 * Green republics meet all the criteria for me, and have already been added.
 * The black ones are the regions that are going to need to be recalculated before I can decide what is good for them.

Circassia I am going to have too take a good look at before I make a decision. I agree that what is the point in uniting if they are not a republic. But I personally don't like the idea of having a republic made of enclaves. This was the main reason I made Gagauzia claim more regions of Moldova. But if any of these Circassian enclaves is meet my criteria, than none of them can be an AR. So for me, its either all or none. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:35, April 28, 2011 (UTC)




 * Just making an update. Looking at the Parade of Sovereignties map, it looks like that the proposed "Shapsugsky National District" seemed more unlikely than the other three Circassian regions. Maybe this proposed district would not hold true here, but the other "republics" would unite to form a Circassian Federation. Sorry, I am OCD, and I am not a big fan of enclaves (as said above). And before I forget it again, I have been using the proposed yellow-blue-yellow-blue flag that may or may not have been proposed for Dagestan. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:23, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * <p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt">(from http://www.vexillographia.ru/russia/index.htm)
 * <p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt">(from http://www.vexillographia.ru/russia/index.htm)

<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt">Declares SSR status in OTL:

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1">1) Mari SSR – Mari EL – October 1990

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1">2) Kadarda-Balkaria SSR – January 1991

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1">3) Mordvin SSR - December 1990

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1">4) Tatar SSR – August 1990

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1">5) Altai SSR – July 1991

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1">6) Dagestan SSR – May 1991

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1">7) Komi SSR – August 1990

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1">8) Yakut SSR – September 1990

<p style="text-indent: -18pt; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1">9) Soviet Republic of Tuva - December 1990

<p style="text-indent: 0cm; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 17.85pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">10) Chechen-Ingush Republic – November 1990, Chechen Republic – July 1991

<p style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0cm; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 17.85pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">11) Bashkir SSR – October 1990

<p style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0cm; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 17.85pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">12) Karachai-Cherkes SSR – November 1990 (as part of RSFSR)

<p style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0cm; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 17.85pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">13) Northern Ossetia SSR – July 1990 (as part of RSFSR)

<p style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0cm; margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 17.85pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">14) Chuvash republic – October 1990

<p style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0cm; margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 17.85pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">15)   South Ossetia Soviet Democratic Republic – October 1990

<p style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0cm; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 17.85pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">16)   Pridnestrovian Moldavian SSR – October 1990

<p style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 0cm; margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 17.85pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-add-space: auto">17)   Gagauz republic – August 1990


 * Well actually, all the ASSRs had some form of declaration of sovereignty (not just the ones you made mention to). I am getting pretty annoyed on trying to make a definition on what is an what isn't a republic. Why not just go all the way. All the autonomous republics will become union republics. The other autonomous enteties would either remain autonomous, or may become republics (depending on their population). I see nothing really wrong with this, and this would be the only way that these regions could really grow. Karelia can also regain its former status as a union republic. I have some interesting ideas, maybe Karelia could re-adopt their former KFSSR flag. Now I am getting excited. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:52, April 29, 2011 (UTC)

Flag and coat of arms proposals
Here is some heraldic proposals of early 1990-s

I have an idea about the State Symbols of the republics. The main image for imitation in the past during the Perestroika times was pre-Stalin USSR of 1920-s. I like an idea that in New Union can be restored some flags and emblems from that times.

Leaders
Really, I can't understand, how VVP (Vladimir Putin) could be USSR president in this TL. OTL he was, eventually, promoted worker from Yeltsin's entourage. He was appointed as successor in 1999, becaurse there was Second Chechen war, and Russia need hard leader to win. But in NU TL was neither Yeltsin no this war.

It may be truism, but the post-Soviet governments passed 3 stages: dissidents - Stanislav Shushkevich, Abulfaz Elchibey, Zviad Gamsakhurdia (in Russia thre was ni this stage, becaurse Andrey Saharov died in 1989); the old Soviet nomenklatura - Yeltsin, Kuchma, Aliyev, Shevardnadze; and new semi-nationalistic leaders - Putin, Yushchenko, Saakashvili. And what would be in NU TL?


 * Hmm... you got me there. I created this timeline with the basic information, and I have not gotten around to looking at the leaders. I guess the USSR would have leaders who are more or less in sync with Gorbachev. Where as people like Yeltsin and Yushchenko would be considered too radical. I always though of Putin being (though nationalist) more or less pro-Soviet and a "Soviet nationalist." If you have any suggestions for new Presidential candidates, I would love to hear the. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 17:16, April 27, 2011 (UTC)

Here are a couple of people who may be good presidents.


 * (seems like the most likely successor of Gorbachev)
 * (maybe)
 * (pretty interesting person)
 * (probably not)
 * (maybe)

That's what I got. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:46, May 9, 2011 (UTC)

I think about presidential elections in USSR.

1) 1995. It will be, in my opinion, the “last parade of nationalists”.

Candidates – in the Union level

a) Nikolai Ryzhkov - CPSU

b) Vladimir Bukovsky – DU (I think that Democratic candidate from former dissidents would be appropriate in situation, when DU is still in opposition)

c) Alexander Lebed - CRC

d) Vladimir Zhirinovsky – LDPSU

RSFSR –

a) Boris Nemtsov - DU

b) Alexander Rutskoy – DCP (Russian filial of CPSU)

Vainakhia

<p style="margin-left: 90pt; text-indent: -18pt;">a)    Ruslan Khasbulatov – CPSU

<p style="margin-left: 90pt; text-indent: -18pt;">b)   Johar Dudayev – Union of Chechen People

To be continued…

2303

Major updates for May 2011
After days of discussion with 2303, I believe we will be witnessing a major change and updating for the New Union timeline during May 2011. The new changes takes into account 2303s understandings of the and the role of communism and non-nationalism within the Soviet Union.

Here are a list of changes that will be taken into account:


 * New Republics: The Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics is a federated state made up of [about] ~30 republics and one federal city. Each republic runs as a sovereign nation, but have agreed to united under a joint and federal government, legislature, president, currency, and foreign relations. Including the nine republics which remained in the Union after glasnost and perestroika (as well as the already canon republics), several of the new republics include:
 * Circassia: The "Circassian Federation" is a republic made up of three Circassian enclaves. The enclaves include the, the Kabardian regions of , and the Cherkessian region of . The republic may also include the Shapsug regions on the Black Sea, but I have not made a decision as of yet.
 * Alania: The united "Republic of Alania," or better known in OTL as Karachay-Balkaria, is the united republic of the and the . I have gone across the internet, and found many sources claiming "Alania" as a good name for the united republic. It should be noted that  is officially named the "Republic of North Ossetia-Alania." As far as I can tell, Alania is primarily favored by the north Ossetians, and not necessarily the south Ossetians. I have already made canon that South Ossetia would be the center of TTL Republic of Ossetia. SO would have been admitted into the Union first, with the Ossetian unification happening when Russia agrees to transfer the north to the south. So in that case, Alania would be free for the Karachay-Balkars.
 * Vainakhia: The "People's Republic of Vainakhia" is actually the reformed government of the formerly proclaimed Chehen-Ingush SSR. With the August Coup not happening, the radical rise of Chehcen nationalism would not take place. Though Chechnya would not become peaceful over night, it would eventually agree on keeping a united government with the Ingush. It was proposed to rename the republic to "Vainakhia," with comes from a historical group that make up modern day Chehcens and Ingush.
 * Cossackia: The Cossacks have played an important role in Russian history. After years of simply claiming them to be Russians, the USSR agrees to define the Cossacks as their own people, and allowing them their own republic. The Rostov Oblast (Don Cossacks), the Krasnodar Krai (Kuban Oblasts), and the Stavropol Krai (Semi-Terek Cossacks) were transferred to the newly formed "Union of Cossack Republics." I have not made any of the following official, or have I even checked for accuracy, but it may be possible that the Crimea neighboring oblasts of the Ukraine may become part of this new republic. But no promises, so consider this as speculative.
 * Border Changes: I want to make it clear for the definitions above. There will be NO border changes to the Caucasian republics in TTL (as in OTL). The only changes will be that Karachay-Cherkessia and Kabardino-Balkaria will be divided into their basic components. The proposed Cossack region of Karahchay-Cherkessia (as well as other Cossack proposals in the region) would be "dropped" from the proposed Cossack state after Russia agrees to allow full Cossack sovereignty on the Stavropol Krai (which would add more area for Cossackia than would the other proposals put together). Plus this makes it easier for me to map out, and who says life is always fair.
 * Along with the key changes above,, , , , , , , and will be added as republics.  and  are currently in question by me. I may make them republics, but since the two did not gain autonomous republic status until the parade of sovereignties, it may be easier (and more likely) that these two may simply remain autonomous republics within Russia.
 * I am also going to be "fudging" the populations of may of the new republics over the next decades from the POD to now. With these republics now having the right to decide their economies and such, who's to say that OTL censuses would be accurate for TTL. So many of the republics would have population growths in TTL. Though not population BOOMS, but you get the idea.


 * The Communist Party may play a more important role in the USSR than I have been saying prior. I remember reading a quote which describes the differences between Soviet communism and Chinese communism, and their reforms. It was something like... "The Soviets were willing to keep communism, but loose the totalitarianism; while the Chinese were willing to loose the communism, but keep the totalitarianism." Though not exactly correct, it is a good way to summarize it. I still need to think and study, but maybe Gorbachev would remain in the CPSU during his terms as President, allowing more reforms in the party. The next President after Gorbachev (see below) may or may not be a member of the Communist Party. There would be a larger "Red Belt" in the region than OTL. The Red Belt is a term used to describes the primarily communist regions within OTL Russia.


 * 2303 made it clear to me that Putin seemed like a bad idea to be President of the Soviet Union. His ideals are more in line with Russian nationalism. After thinking about it, I agree. Same goes with other politicians in the CIS today, in which there would be a new lineup of Presidents and so on. Though I have no idea at the present, it would be pretty interesting.

None of this has been made canon yet. However, I believe I may begin making many (if not all) of these canon during the first week of May. I want to leave open any corrections or last minute suggestions. Otherwise, I am really looking forward to this. Also, sorry for sounding outright in my speech, I have had a LONG day today, you know what I mean ;P --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 00:52, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

Updates


If all of the ASSRs are going to be upgraded to full SSRs (I love abbreviations), than I believe we are going to have to also question on even more republics. With the parade of sovereignties having this kind of affect on Russia, and no Putin or semi-nationalist politicians in power, I believe we may see more autonomous regions declaring upgrading or even full republican status, or even [re]unification of more regions.

Here is a quick map I made to show what I mean. In recent years, Russia has gone threw steps to unify many of the federal subjects into larger (less autonomous) krais (you can read more about that here). But with Gorbachev remaining in power, and the sovereignty movements being successful, how is to say that wouldn't want to have the  and the  reunited into a Greater Buryatia, or  wanting to reunite with the  to create a Greater Komia. I also believe (in possibility) the Chukchi okrugs may unit to form a Chukchia, the Nenets may unite to form a Greater Nenetsia, while Evenkia, Khantia-Mansia, and the Jewish AO may request similar upgrades.

My real question is what would these regions become? Would they remain in Russia as ASSRs, or request full republican status. Not too sure at the percent, but I believe these regions would be more happy to remain in Russia. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 15:34, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

1) Greater Buryatia - very poussible, I think. As SSR. But is one problem - some Buryat nationalists want to unite whis Mongolia...

2) Greater Komi - I don't know any precedent.. but TTL may be.

3)Nenetsia - from Nenetsia+Yamal+Taimyr may create VERY BIG thinly populated but VERY RICH region (oil, nikel...). Economic power will fully provide status SSR.

4) Chukotka+Koryakia? WHY? I think they can't unite by definition....


 * I wouldn't worry to much about Mongolian nationalism. A greater Komia seemed like an interesting idea. Not too sure now if Nenetsia would be allowed republican status, but if it is that rich in resources, than maybe we could see a population boom in TTL. The reason I though about Chukotka and Koryakia uniting into Chukchia is because (ethnically) the two regions are similar. Similar to how the Circassians united, this may be a way for them to gain republican status. I also though about it because of another timeline I read. What do you think about the other regions? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:07, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * 1))In contrast to the Circassians, the Chukchi and Koryak was no such unionist movement. And this people are predominantly assimilated - only third of the Koryak speaks native languages
 * 2)Demographic boom in Nenetsia is hardly possible. It is a country where, except for mushrooms and berries do not grow nothing. So, most of the food products they have brought from Central Russia.
 * 3) Khanty-Mansi - same as Nenetsia
 * 4)Evenkia - poor, thinly populated (17000 in 2006) and cold region. Maximum ASSR.
 * 5)Jewish Autonomous Region - national region only for name (4% Jews in 1989, 1,2% now) Why should they raise their status?
 * And - about first map - Moscow in russian is not Федеральный город, but Город Союзного Подчинения
 * 5)Jewish Autonomous Region - national region only for name (4% Jews in 1989, 1,2% now) Why should they raise their status?
 * And - about first map - Moscow in russian is not Федеральный город, but Город Союзного Подчинения
 * And - about first map - Moscow in russian is not Федеральный город, but Город Союзного Подчинения




 * I think I am now clear and ready to make canon soon. The USSR will be a federated state of 31 republics and one Union City. All of the ASSrs will be upgraded to SSRs, while the other autonomous regions will simply be upgraded to ASSRs (including Altai, Khakassia, and some of areas I made mention above). --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:12, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

India
While looking at Indian politics for annother TL I came across the fact that the Indian Comunist Party (Marxist) has long been the third or fourth major player in Indian politics. I was wondering that in light of the reformation they might stand a better chance at taking power. In 1991 they came fourth in the elections but at the time India was suffering an economic crisis but I was wondering if the example Soviet Communism without Tolatitarianism might swing votes in favour of them and allow them to take power leading to a much closer relationship with the USSR at least as strong as that between India and Russia today. Otherwise I find it unlikely that the relationship would be anywhere close enough for them to conduct military exercises (GOASIE). Thoughts plz?Vegas adict 18:44, April 30, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well from what I understand, India had a pro-Soviet feel during the Cold War. I can't really see how India would move further away from the Soviet Union in TTL, especially if Pakistan intervenes in Afghanistan. But in the long run, I am not really an expert on Indian politics. But if you feel that the ICP may have a better chance in TTL, than I see no trouble with that at all. As long as it doesn't turn India into a single-party state. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 20:31, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

I could see them getting more votes, but them actually coming to power is unrealistic. Lordganon 23:09, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

Up until about 2004 yes but they came third in 2004 and with extra votes in this TL it might gain enough to lead the Left-Wing coalition that ended up in charge.Vegas adict 16:07, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Just not realistic. The entire Left Front, which is the communist-led bloc, only got about 8%, with the two communist parties themselves getting about 7 out of that 8 percent. The Congress party, leader of the left-center United Progressive Alliance, got about 27% of the vote. It is virtually impossible for the Communists to gain that much ground, especially since outside of Northeastern India, and a single Southern state, they don't get many votes. Lordganon 06:28, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

I supposeVegas adict 17:53, May 10, 2011 (UTC)

U guys need the help of an Indian here. "Que Me". India was very pro-Soviet in the Cold War and most of India's Millitary arms are bought from Russia to this day. However Communists coming to power is not possible. However, in this TL, Russia might try and meditate talks between India and Pakistan as well as Bangladesh. Eventually the two governments could use the example of Russia for unification. India is not a small country, although it would be dwarfed by Russia, India plays a role in Asia as well as the rest of the world.

The Crimea made my brain explode!!
Now is the perfect time for you all to take advantage of my mental deficiencies and pudding pudding pudding...

No seriously, I am beginning to get really frustrated with the republics of the USSR. I have gotten two requests to make the Crimea its own republic, and I am beginning to loose my mind. The Crimea was histrionically the home of the Crimean Tatars, but today there are more Russians and Ukrainians in the Crimea than there are Tatars. It is confusing the sh** out of me, and we need to come up with a consensus right now. Is the USSR going to be divided by ethnics, demographics, or both?

Personally, I love the idea of adding the Crimea as a republic. IMHO, the more the merrier. But I also hate the idea of leaving many regions out if there isn't a good enough reason. I think I may have to rethink what this new union really is. I keep thinking of it as an EU-like entity, when it should continue to be a US-like entity. I have also taken a lot of historical similarities from the proposed. Had it been successful, the Austro-Hungarian Empire would have become a federation of three German states, two Hungarian states, two Italian states, as well as states for the Slovens, the [Serbo-]Croatians, the Czechs, Slovaks, Poles, Ukrainians, Romanians, and not to mention the many German autonomous enclaves. In short, if they could have been divided into multiple ethnic state, why am I keeping the USSR under a membership basis?

So I believe we need to come to a consensus with the remaining autonomous regions before we go on any further. Like I said, I personally love the idea of adding new republics. So for the time being, I am proposing new republics of the USSR. They are:


 * Altai: I can support it.


 * Artsakh: Also known as the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. The USSR and Armenia would come to a peace agreement on the region early on, leaving the region under Soviet control and allowing them their continued autonomy. They may parlay their continuation in the USSR by being upgraded into a full republic. They could also become the Pridnestrovie of the region, acting as the successor state of the Armenian SSR.


 * Federation of the Ob: Or something along that name. It would be a federation between the sparsely populated regions of Evenkia, Khantia-Mansia, Nenetsia, Taymyria, and Yamalia. I originally proposed combining the Nenets regions into a Greater Nenetsia (which I do not believe was ever proposed), but maybe it would be better for them all if they unite into a single union republic, becoming something like the Dagestan of the region, or something like the of Ethiopia. The majority of the ethnic groups represented are part of the Uralic family, while the other is Altic. I named the region after the  and the, which dominates the coastal region of this republic. But this is only a temporary name. Anybody got any suggestions?


 * Chukotka/Chukchia: My proposed republic which unites and . The reason I continue to propose uniting the two regions is simple, they are both  peoples. If they are anything like the Nenets or the Circassians, this is a clear case of the Russians dividing them to conquer them. The peoples were united with Yakuts during the civil war, and I'm also a big fan of another incarnation of this state. If you guys can accept a united Nenetsia, why not a united Chukchia?


 * Crimea: I support it.


 * Jewish AO: Very, very interesting IMO. Read this and you get what I mean. 2303 made mention that it is only a national region, but I somewhat support it becoming a republic. The Jewish have gone threw hell (especially by the Soviets, let alone the Nazis). Why not give them a second "homeland"? My only dilemma about it would be the name?


 * Khakassia: I would support it.


 * Talyshistan: It would be the proposed . In OTL, it formed out of bad tensions in Baku after independence, but maybe it could form peacefully.

If I am missing any region, please let me know. I would really appreciate any and all comments. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 00:51, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Don't know if you were thinking about adding Kalmykia as one or not, but those people are so different from those around them that is makes a ton of sense.

Altai might be possible, but the Russians have a clear majority here, so I find it unlikely.

Artsakh makes total sense. Would prevent a ton of squabbling too.

Ob is a good idea, though definitely not as a name. I really can;t think of another, mind.

Chukotka/Chukchia is good. Run with it.

Making the Jewish region a republic is a bad idea. The amount of Jews actually living there today otl is 1.2% of the population, and it has never been more than 16% of it (and that was around WWII). Just doesn't work.

Khakassia and Talyshistan are good.

Now, the Crimean region is a tad more delicate. Like many areas in the Western USSR with many people of a different nationality than the main one in that republic, Stalin deported a massive number of them to Siberia. They are returning, ever since they were allowed to do so, in fairly large numbers (something which is causing great disputes, obviously). With how this TL is, they'd be doing it with support. It's perfectly reasonable for them to have their own Republic.

Lordganon 03:55, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Thought I'd pipe in. I agree with LG about the Jewish Autonomous Oblast. Looks tempting, but it really won't constitute a republic. There are only about 3,000 Jews left lol. I would also suggest Tuva, having been independent for a notable, and having a majority population of 77% Tuvans. Not only that but it would help preserve the culture and encourage throat singing lol. Also I agree on Kalmykia, even though it's been diluted a bit by Russian culture, it is still nothing like its surroundings. Both Tuva and Kalmykia are pretty depopulated, but compared to other areas they're culturally rich and deserve a place as SSRs. <small style="color:#004400">Detectivekenny (Info; Talk) 05:03, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

And, like with Crimea, the Tuvans and Kalmykians - and those two are far from the only ones - have substantial populations in Siberia, the Urals, etc. that have been returning to their homelands since the Soviet Government let them.

Kalmykia, for instance, was about 75% Kalmyk in 1926. By the start of WWII, due to Stalin and what amounted to colonization by Russians, this had become 49%. Reaching a low of 35% in 1959, after the deportations, by 1989 it had recovered to 45%, as they had been allowed to come back, though without support. Today, it is 53%, a definite majority.

The same principle has been seen in the majority of Autonomous areas, ASSRs, etc. west of the Urals, and even somewhat beyond.

Lordganon 06:35, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Well, I already added Kalmykia and Tuva as republics. In fact, I have upgraded every autonomous regions to a republic, but I excluded the ones I made mention above. The map I made above shows the republics that I have already agreed to allow. I agree, many of them have a Russian majority, but many continue to be persistent that they become republics. Karelia is somewhat a good example. It was once a republic of the USSR (see the ), downgraded, and is now the within Russia. Only Nakchivan, (the Kaliningrad Oblast), and  I have left out, because their autonomy is primarily there because of their locations and not because of ethnic populations or history.

So from what I hear, the consensus is:
 * Yes
 * Altai
 * Artsakh
 * Chukchia
 * Crimea
 * Khakassia
 * "Ob"
 * Talyshistan


 * No
 * Jewish Autonomous Oblast

--NuclearVacuum (Talk) 15:17, May 5, 2011 (UTC)




 * Update: I am making a quick update to my statement before. I have decided to unite the three Nenets states as one Nenetsia, leaving Yugra and Evenkia out of any federation. Yugra shows enough population and economy to become a republic on its own right. As for Evenkia, its population is very, very, very low. I think they would be better off continuing their autonomy. I made a new map showing the republics as of now. Evenkia and the Jewish AO remain autonomous entities within Russia. What do you all think? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:16, May 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * 1) Crimea is Russian or Tatar or mixed republic? Becaurse there are not so mane Tatars there, I think that will be better to create Tatar AR in Crimean SSR
 * 2) I' m not agree with united Chukotka-Koryakia. I simply can't afford to provide such thing.
 * 3) Nenetsia and Yugra - I agree.
 * 4) Talishstan - better for it to be AR in Azerbaijan
 * 2303
 * 2303


 * With Crimea, as with virtually each and every minority region west of the Urals, there were massive deportations at the end of/during WWII. Those people have been returning to those areas ever since, and long clamored for it, politically. There's also no set area in the Crimea where the Tartars are. With the setup in this ATL, they definitely would be getting some support, unlike otl. It makes sense, and the Russians living there would agree with the logic too. Lordganon 06:14, May 6, 2011 (UTC)


 * I now about deportations. But OTL the creation of the ARC in 1990-1991 (before POD) has gone into the context of exactly Russian autonomy in Ukraine, and its first president Yuri Meshkov was from party with the telling name Russian Bloc. May be TTL Crimea will be mixed republic, in which all the peoples who inhabit it (Russians, Tatars, Karaites, Greeks and Armenians have equal status. 2303

IMO, it should be either all or none. At this point in history, the Crimea becoming a republic is just as logical as making Komia or Buryatia a full republic. But give them time to grow, and you never know what could happen. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 14:47, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Death of Osama Bin Laden
Recommendations for New Union Universe version of Osama bin Laden's death: A good way to have this universe's version of the death of Osama Bin Ladin is this: A joint Team of US Navy Seals and Soviet Spetsnaz breaks in Osama Bin Laden's hideout, executes the terrorist leader, and takes custody of his body. US President John Kerry wanted to bury Bin Laden's body at sea with no photos going public. However Soviet President Medvedev wants to bring his body to Moscow. So the Spetsnaz are ordered to move the body to the Soviet Union. The SEALs decides not to interfer since they don't personally agree with President Kerry's decision. Experiment632 05:34, May 7, 2011 (UTC)experiment632


 * Well two things. First off, Medvedev will no longer be leader of the Soviet Union for this timeline. In short, Putin and Medvedev would not fit the political background of the USSR in TTL, and will be replaced with different leaders (ones who are [more or less] in sync with Gorbachev). I like the idea of a joint Seals and Spetsnaz mission, but I am still not too sure about bin Laden in TTL. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 19:15, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Did 9/11 even happen in this timeline? And whats all that stuff about Al Qaeda being in sudan?173.78.63.182 22:38, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

Yes 9/11 happens in America and i read somewhere in this TL that 9/11 style attacks happen on the Russian Union aswell. However, his base of operations is Somalia in this timeline. It is in the page about the timeline of the New Union. 86.153.249.120 20:56, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

Leningrad Compromise
I remember this idea I had long ago, and maybe it could help us out here. I called it the. It would have been an agreement between Russia and its many autonomous republics on the future of their status. The agreements as part of the compromise were something like:


 * 1) Russia will recognize the sovereignty and secession of all the ASSRs (as defined by the 1989 census) within Russia's jurisdiction. This would mean that Altai and Khakassia would not be recognized.
 * 2) The remaining autonomous areas within Russia would be allowed to upgrade their autonomy to full ASSR (if they so desire).
 * 3) An agreement would be made on a presage and final criteria for what constitutes a republic of the USSR.

That's the rough description, but I think it could work out for this. So with this, the list of republics would be:


 * 1) Abkhazia
 * 2) Alania (Karachay-Balkaria)
 * 3) Artsakh (would become a republic as part of a treaty with Armenia to prevent war)
 * 4) Azerbaijan
 * 5) Bashkortostan
 * 6) Belorussia (Belarus)
 * 7) Buryatia
 * 8) Chuvashia
 * 9) Circassia
 * 10) Cossackia
 * 11) Crimea? (maybe or maybe not)
 * 12) Dagestan
 * 13) Gagauzia
 * 14) Kalmykia
 * 15) Karakalpakstan
 * 16) Karelia
 * 17) Kazakhstan
 * 18) Komia
 * 19) Kyrgyzstan
 * 20) Mari El
 * 21) Mordovia
 * 22) Ossetia
 * 23) Pridnestrovie (Transnistria)
 * 24) Russia
 * 25) Tajikistan
 * 26) Tatarstan
 * 27) Turkmenistan
 * 28) Tuva
 * 29) Udmurtia
 * 30) Ukraine
 * 31) Uzbekistan
 * 32) Vainakhia (Checheno-Ingushetia)
 * 33) Yakutia

The remaining regions would be allowed to raise their autonomous status if they so wished.

The criteria I propose for future republics would be something along the lines of:
 * The proposed republic must have a population no less than half a million people (500,000).
 * The proposed republic must have a titular population make up (at the least) 1/4 the population.

As for the Crimea, I think we need to ask the question... What would the Crimea do? The Crimea was able to regain its ASSR status in OTL (prior to the POD). With the Ukraine remaining in the USSR (if not more reluctant), would the Crimeans really feel threatened by the Ukrainians that they would push for republican status in the early years? However, as I believe would play an important role in the development of the republics in TTL, Soviet optimism may lead to a boom in the Crimean Tatar population. When I mean "boom," I don't mean that the population would be fixed over night, but that the possibility that more Tatars return to the Crimea. With the (Volga) Tatars also gaining their own republic, maybe the population would grow more in the Crimean favor. OTL's Tatar population is currently 12% the population. Maybe TTL we could see an increase to (at the most) 25% the population. That seems like a possibility. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:26, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

I like the list, and the new criteria.

Crimea has always been a somewhat special case. Not only do you have the Tartars - who, as you say, are likely now able to return in much larger numbers (government support, no international boundary to cross, etc) than otl. Not only that, but the Russian population on that peninsula is a massive majority, with only a couple Ukrainian districts coming close. And, if you factor in the Tartars making up half of the non-Russians, the number of Ukrainian speakers is only in the area of 10% otl, which wouldn't change too much atl. Even in the two regions of the Eastern Ukraine with mostly Russian-speakers there's at least 25% that speak Ukrainian. Between the Tartars and the Russians, having its own region makes sense. And, if nothing else, you can also factor in the Black Sea Fleet into this, as it would have a say in the matter too, I'm sure.

Lordganon 23:32, May 8, 2011 (UTC)

More Sh** to finalize
Comrades, how are you? I am happy that the new changes are about canon. I just want to also make a few more changes to the timeline, nothing really major, but yeah. Here they are:

Those are the only two I can think of at the moment. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 15:20, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * The Kuril dispute between Japan and the USSR WILL be settled in TTL. However, neither the Soviet definition or the Japanese definition will become the final border. I have decided that Japan will gain, , and ; with the Soviets continuing to have control over . Why this border?
 * I believe the fact that Japan gaining any of these islands would be a great compromise for for the Japanese, leading to total peace between the Union and the Empire.
 * The northern most island (Iturup) has a on it, I am not too sure that they would want to give it up.
 * Probably the most likely reason for this border change... area. Russia has divided the southern three islands as their own district within the Sakhalin Oblast. While the northern most is combined with other islands. Call me lazy, but I like this definition better.
 * Seeing as Putin is too nationalist to be President of the USSR, I believe I will be changing it so will succeed Gorbachev. As for who will succeed him, I can't say at the moment. I think Ryzhkov makes a good candidate for President.


 * He, or Alexander Rutskoi, leader of fraction "Communists for the Democracy". He was wery popular in early 1990-s/ And, I think, that Gobachev will loose the 1995 elections.. and Rutskoi succeed him ~2303


 * I never though about Rutskoy. But as for him winning the election in 1995, I say not. With the USSR getting better by 1995, Gorbachev would be reelected for a final term. I do like the idea of there being more presidents. Maybe Gorbachev would declare not to run for reeletion in 1995, allowing Rutskoy to win. "Communists for Democracy," I remember reading about this, but I never know Rutskoy was in it. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:26, May 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * <p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt">Rutskoy Alexander. Born in 1947. Major General of Aviation (1991). He fought in Afghanistan. Hero of the Soviet Union (1988). In 1990, Rutskoy was elected deputy of the RSFSR. During the III Congress of People's Deputies (March 31, 1991) Rutskoy announced the creation of the parliamentary group "Communists for Democracy”, which support Yeltsin. June 12, 1991 Rutskoy was elected vice-president of the RSFSR in conjunction with Yeltsin. In July 1991 he became established on the basis of the "Communists for Democracy" Democratic Party of Communists. But after the collapse of the Soviet Union went into opposition to Yeltsin. Collapse of the Soviet Union turned him from a social democrat in a nationalist, in which quality he played in 1993 and later.
 * <p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt">Rutskoy Alexander. Born in 1947. Major General of Aviation (1991). He fought in Afghanistan. Hero of the Soviet Union (1988). In 1990, Rutskoy was elected deputy of the RSFSR. During the III Congress of People's Deputies (March 31, 1991) Rutskoy announced the creation of the parliamentary group "Communists for Democracy”, which support Yeltsin. June 12, 1991 Rutskoy was elected vice-president of the RSFSR in conjunction with Yeltsin. In July 1991 he became established on the basis of the "Communists for Democracy" Democratic Party of Communists. But after the collapse of the Soviet Union went into opposition to Yeltsin. Collapse of the Soviet Union turned him from a social democrat in a nationalist, in which quality he played in 1993 and later.

~2303

Looks good to me, Nuke. Lordganon 07:00, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

Больше! Больше! Больше!
I Gotses some more idears! Excuse the grammar, but I am in a silly and good mood at the moment. Here are some of those ideas.


 * Armenian-Soviet friendship: I made a poll weeks ago on whether Armenia would rejoin the USSR. Though the votes seemed to favor the idea (5 out of 7 agree), I want to say that it will not happen for this timeline. However, the idea I have though of instead may be more interesting. Instead of becoming a republic again, Armenia will become a greater ally for the USSR. If anybody has ever seen, my idea for Armenia would like OTL Belarus (but less intense and less creepy XD). Armenia would be a big ally of the USSR, and vice versa. The ideas of reunification are talked about in politics, and it may happen in the future.


 * Georgia-Estonia swap places?: I have already made canon that Estonia will move more and more away from the USSR, and growing to almost a stalker on Finland, but what about Georgia? I have read before that despite their efforts to be independent, they would remain in a Soviet sphere of influence. So maybe with Abkhazia and South Ossetia out of Georgia's control early on, and a continued Soviet presence, Georgia would become the "reluctant" ally of the USSR. The USSR and Georgia would cooperate together, but in comparison to neighboring, pro-Soviet Armenia; Georgia would more or less be a dog on a chain. They would keep their "canton" flag, rather than adopting a variant of St. George's Cross; and would not move towards the nationalist state that it is in OTL.


 * Spationautes: Again, something I mentioned months ago, but never came to a conclusion. I have decided that with the USSR continuing, the ESA (led by France) would continue their Hermes program. By 1997, Europe will have their own human spaceflight program. If Mir-2 and Freedom aren't going to become an ISS, than why would France expect any special treatment from the Soviets. Plus I love the idea of there being more spacefaring nations.




 * Hetalia and SATW FTW!: I am a huge fan of and Scandinavia and the World. After seeing someone make a page about an alternate Hetalia, I am more interested in doing something similar. Not just for New Union, but for all my timelines. I have some ideas, but nothing I can write in just one bullet list. Here is a quicky image I made for fun. Its from the first episode of Hetalia. Instead of Russia and Belarus pestering Latvia, its Russia (USSR) and Armenia pestering Georgia. Though I can see Russia (USSR) looking as OTL Russia does, I am pretty sure Armenia and Georgia would look different. So again, this was just for fun.

КОНЕЦ!!! --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 01:16, May 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * So long as the A-K dispute is settled at least somewhat in its favor - like you've done here - Armenia would easily be a friend. I just can't see the Georgians going along with anything like that at all. Especially with regards to their flag - Georgians hate, and always have, that "canton" flag. Cooperating to a degree, sure, but any sort of ally is likely out of the question. Think like Armenia with regards to Russia otl. All the rest sounds good. Lordganon 13:28, May 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Hm... okay. I guess Georgia could adopt its new flag, but I am still keen on the idea that Georgia will remain in a "sphere of influence." I still don't think they would have adopted a nationalist government (or Saakashvili won't come into power). But if that's the case, than wouldn't Georgia keep their canton flag? Shevardnadze didn't support changing the flag, with it only being adopted during Saakashvili's term. Not too sure, getting confused. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 15:22, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

An update: Here is what I am thinking about now:


 * Armenia would be pro-Soviet, but also pro-Independent. The Armenian economy is dependent heavily on the USSR, and stuff. Russia and Armenia are members of the CSTO, and Russia has even agreed to go to war for Armenia if Turkey were to attack. Artsakh is its own republic of the USSR, but also has a close tie with Armenia. As part of the agreement to bring peace, Armenians gain easy access through Azerbaijan to help in the Artsakh economy, and Azeri gain easy access though Armenia to Nakhchivan. Artsakh and Armenia still show interest in uniting one day, but Artaskians tend to favor a unification within the Soviet Union, or a continued Soviet friendship.


 * Georgia: Though more resistant of the USSR, Georgia would find itself more and more tied to the USSR. Though gaining good relations with Europe and the USA, Georgia would also depend heavily on Soviet trade to survive. Despite the fact that Georgia lost Abkhazia and South Ossetia, The Georgian-Soviet relations are though to be better than they have been in decades. Georgia would also be a member of the CSTO, and would also work on trade agreements between the USSR and Armenia. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:04, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

That's more or less the Armenian situation otl, for Georgia atl.

No, Georgia really wouldn't keep it. The vast majority of Georgians wanted the flag change - which is essentially the flag of the old Georgian Kingdom, not anything remotely new - and Shevardnadze was pretty much the only reason it didn't happen before 2003. Here, he would not be able to establish his dictatorship, and whoever came to power after him would do the change. As a matter of fact, the Georgian Parliament passed a bill for the flag change otl in 1999, even with his opposition, and that was the only reason it took as long as it did to get it put in afterwards, as well as the time it took for the bill in the first place. And, the otl flag after independence being adopted was as much a fluke as anything, too.

Lordganon 19:59, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

Hetalia (New Union)
I, too am a huge fan of Hetalia. I was the one to write the page on the alternate Hetalia. I'd be willing to write a page for New Union's Hetalia.

Yank 01:36, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

I have created the Hetalia (New Union) page for you. I just want you to supply the name of the USSR's faction, as well as the nations in each faction.
 * Really? That was you? You did a really interesting job. I would be honored if you want to make a page for the New Union timeline. Feel free to do so. But if you don't mind, I may want to design the characters for Armenia and Georiga... or at least begin them. Otherwise, thank you again. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 15:37, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

Yank 15:14, May 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * Wow, thank you so much. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 15:42, May 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * Not saying the premise is bad or anything, but should it really be called "Hetalia" (incompetent Italia) when the web comic/anime is about the USSR? ChrisL123 15:47, May 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * You got a point. But (as I hope it is true), Cold War Hetalia is a spin-off of the original Axis Powers Hetalia. So if that is true, we are just seeing a new timeperiod of Hetalia. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 16:09, May 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * The POD is in the 80's. That means World War II is unchanged, and so are Japanese sterotypes created by said war. The Italians would still be viewed as spineless cowards. It should be written that Hetalia: Axis Powers came first and ran its course, and Hetalia: Cold War was born afterwards. In this respect it's more of an equivilent to the Hetalia: World Series that I've been hearing about, but unable to get due to near-constant red tape.
 * Yank 11:21, July 8, 2011 (UTC)



Vote for the Cosmonaut!!
Here are some more ideas that I have thought about lately.


 * President Tereshkova: Currently, I am locked in my Venusian Haven timeline. After reading more about my protagonist, I found out that she was more than just a cosmonaut. After her time in space, she became a member of the Supreme Soviet, a member of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet, and was in the Central Committee of the Communist Party. After the collapse of the USSR, she lost her political prestige. But with the USSR continuing, maybe she would continue to climb up the political ladder, and making her a very interesting candidate for President. She would probably have the full support of the female voters, the working class, and her public knowledge as the first woman in space would probably help her out even further. As for her political background, I believe she would (more or less) follow Gorbachev's model. Plus the fact that a former actor (Ronald Regan) was able to become President and help bring an end to the Cold War, or having Schwarzenegger being the "Governator," why not finally have a cosmonaut President of the USSR. Probably better than having a KGB agent or a Puppet (at least for this timeline). So the presidential lineup (as I support) would be:


 * Gorbachev (1990-1995)
 * Ryzhkov (1995-2005)
 * Tereshkova (2005-Present)


 * Belarus or Belorussia?: Here is a question I have had for a while now. It's pretty much fact, Belarus is a very, very, very, very weird nation. They supported remaining in the USSR to the very end, supported the August Coup, yet they declared independence within days of the coup, changed their name a flag, only to change their flag back and want to be reunited with Russia. Again, very confusing and very weird. But with the August coup never happening, I am semi-confident that the Belorussian SSR would support the continuation of the name "Belorussia" (not the pro-independent "Belarus"). My only question would really be on their flag. With them remaining in a USSR, they would probably feel safer to express themselves as an individual republic. So wouldn't they want to adopt their white-red-white flag? It just seems very backwards in comparison with OTL. So you can see why it sounds very hard for me to get a strait answer. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 19:13, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

1)You talk as if CPSU is only political power in USSR. But in TTL to 2005 USSR is the multiparty state, so why not somebody from other parties win presidental election?

2)Official name wil be Белорусская ССР. Белоруссия and Беларусь will use with same frecuency, I think

2303

I like the thought if her becoming president. Sounds very atl.

Probably they would stick with Belorussia. As for their flag, I agree that them using the the white-red-white flag is very likely.

Lordganon 09:03, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, yes. Sorry about that. I know the USSR is a multi-party state, but I am getting quite confused as well. After removing Putin from the Presidency, I can't really think of any other parties. I still believe that in a world where the CPSU has been reformed and no longer holds full control of the nation would probably remain in good favor for the higher authorities (i.e., President). I know it sounds weird, but nothing is really canon yet. Maybe Tereshkova would be an Independent, or something, not really too sure. I still need to work out the political parties of the USSR, and which ones hold higher authority in the Supreme Soviet and political offices. But I will figure something out before making anything canon. As for Lordganon (lolz, just realized your name XP), President Tereshkova does sound pretty ATL, now I like her even more. As for the name of Belorussia, I believe they may rename themselves the "Republic of Belorussia" or the "Belorussian Republic," since all the republics seem to be dropping the "Soviet Socialist" from there names. IMHO, it also seems very redundant to refer to all the republics officially as SSRs (especially in TTL). That would be like calling Florida the "American Democratic State of Florida," no need to go into too much detail. Personally, I like Belorussia's white-red-white flag more than their SSR and variant flag. Can't really say why. Makes no sense, I like Belarus's white-red-white flag, but I hate Russia's white-blue-red flag. That is why I am very insistent that Russia keep its old SSR flag in TTL. But that story is for another day. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 14:22, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

And now for something completely different
Here is another idea I though of a while ago, and I wanted to get some feedback on it. This idea would probably be complete bull, and would probably not work out. But still, can't hurt to throw it around the table. Okay, this idea comes from the, and the fact that most of the communist states supported the USSR. Only Albania and Somalia (and I think Cambodia?) supported the PRC, while North Korea and Yugoslavia remained neutral from both. With the collapse of communism, all the remaining states (excluding Cuba) now support the PRC. But with a continuing USSR, could this be different? I know the relations with these former allies were rocky around the POD, but maybe we could see a greater loosening of total communist control in these nations. Maybe Cuba, Laos, and Vietnam (I dough NK and PRC would do so) would move with the USSR towards a less-hardline government. But again, this is just an idea, and I am not too sure it would work out. If anything, the former Soviet allies would remain allies of the USSR, not moving towards China. Any thoughts? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 14:22, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, many of them would likely remain allied to some degree. Off-hand, I'd say the more hard-line the regime, the less likely they'd be to remain that here, and vice-versa. Another good idea overall. Lordganon 18:29, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

Why can't China be influenced by Russia and become allies with them. It might simplyfy somethings (or maybe complicate them :/ ). I hope u consider my ideas. 86.153.249.120 21:04, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

Political parties
My vision of the political parties in the USSR

1) CPSU - I think, this party will die in TTL too. OTL it was murder, TTL it will be slow natural death to middle 1990-s. This party can split into 3 main parts

a) Democratic Communist Party - party of Rutskoy, social-democratic party

b) some Stalinist, Soviet Nationalist party (such as OTL CPRF)

c) Trotskyist and anarchist movements

2) Democratic Union - Union of Liberal movements and parties of different republics. IMHO, DU will have a strong position in RSFSR - since the Yeltsin times, as opposing the Union center.

3) Socialist Union

4)Congress of Russian Communities - Russian Nationalist party. Particularly strong in republics with great Russian minority - Crimea, Pridnestrovie, Kazakhstan

5) Different national parties

6)Russian National Unity - fascist party. Banned as well as OTL, but actively involved in the illegal position


 * Sounds pretty good. I was also thinking that the CPSU would be divided between several factions, but I was (more or less) thinking:
 * "Perestroikists" (Gorbachev/Ryzhkov)
 * Communists for Democracy (Rutskoy)
 * Hardliners
 * But in the end, the CPSU would remain in tact. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 20:44, May 23, 2011 (UTC)

North Korea: A friend of America?
After getting a positive response to my thoughts about the remaining communist nations, I wanted to detail what I have been thinking. I say again, I am not suggesting canonization right off the back, this is more of a cross talk I am looking for (throwing ideas around and stuff). Anyway, here are my ideas:

I consider Vietnam and Laos to move in a (more or less) similar direction in comparison with each other. The only real difference I see would be that the two continue to request Soviet assistance, not Chinese. With a looser communist system in the USSR, Laos and Vietnam may move in a similar direction. Both would drop the single-party system, but the communist parties would remain in significant power. Both would move towards a Soviet-styled economy, and (just as in OTL) both nations would establish better relations with its neighbors (becoming part of ASEAN). I know very little about the two, so I can't go too much into detail.
 * Vietnam and Laos

Unlike OTL, Cuba would virtually have no choice but to continue relations with the USSR (in order to survive). Much like in the case of Eastern Europe and Africa, the reforms of the USSR would begin to take effect in Cuba. I can't think how far it would go, but maybe we could see the CPC loosen like the CPSU, moving away from hardline communism. Multiple parties would form. Elections would take place, and relations with the US may grow friendlier.
 * Cuba

Here is the million dollar question, can NK be any different in TTL? After thinking about it, here is my idea on what could be the most positive and likely outcome. Feel free to laugh your asses off.
 * North Korea

In combinations of the political and economic reforms in both the USSR and the PRC, famine, pressure from the US and South Korea (and maybe from Gorbachev too), SK accusations that the North are responsible for recent devastation in the South, and the eventual death of Kim Il-sung; the North could move in a different direction than OTL. What I can see as a possibility, Kim Jong-il may be pressured to loosen communist grip in NK. Kim could move NK towards a Chinese-styled economy, and open itself up to the world. As with the cooperation between North and South in OTL, maybe it could go further with the North and South actually signing a treaty that ends the Korean War. Though the DMZ would not become a public symbol as with the Berlin Wall, its usage to both sides would become less needed, allowing for the gradual removal of the DMZ. With the DMZ and war over, the US may begin to withdrawal its troops from the peninsula. As similar to the Two Chinas, both Koreas would probably continue to believe that the other is a rouge state controlling parts of their territory, but with more cooperation between both governments. Though NK would not completely open itself up, it would begin to loose its "hermit" ideals of isolationism. As with Gorbachev recognizing and forming relations with South Korea, maybe the Americans would do a similar gesture to the North. I don't think this would completely change the North's feel for the US, but maybe it could get warmer (as was the case of post-WWII feeling of the Germans and Japanese).

As I said before, this is just an idea, sorry if it sounds too optimistic. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:45, May 26, 2011 (UTC)

Sounds about right for Vietnam, Laos and Cuba, but that does sound too optimistic for North Korea. The Kims are all just a touch too crazy to go along with any of that - otl, with similar pressures, they are still this way, so it's unlikely that they would do it atl. The USSR re-organizing, etc. like is the case here would more likely have the opposite effect then in Germany and China, kinda worse than otl. I could see Gorby warming to the south, and the US doing so a touch to the north, but going much further is probably a touch out there. The Kims, after all, with how they run that place, wouldn't even have popular pressure, so to speak, to make them go along with anything. Lordganon 09:38, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

I liked the idea and would have gone a bit furthur with suggesting assination of Kim by a Soviet or American agent and then the situation changing so much that talks of unification would be on the cards. A little ambitious and optimistic but just seems nice. 86.153.249.120 21:17, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

Kim Jong-Il is too much of a dangerous loose cannon to keep alive. Given his unpredictable personality it would make strategic sense to take him out and to restructure the North Korean government. All things considered the assassination would likely be one of the few things the Americans and Soviets could agree on. I could almost see a joint CIA-KGB op to either terminate or overthow him. Likewise, I could see Soviet-American cooperation in the fight against terrorism.

Yank 11:35, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

Other
I think, that TTL capital of Kazakhstan would be in Alma-Ata (or Almaty). Relocation of the capital to Tselinograd (Astana) was caused by the presence of a large Russian minority in the Northern Kazakhstan and threat of separatism in this region.

2303


 * Thank you for the heads up. I was aware of this for a while now. I just have been busy to go around and change the information. All of the new works have the Kazakh capital at Almaty. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 14:16, June 1, 2011 (UTC)


 * Vladikavkaz or Dzaudzhikau?
 * OTL since 1990 Vladikavkaz is the official name of former Ordzhonikidze, and Dzaudzhikau - unofficial Ossetian name. But in NU TL, where Ossetia is the Union republic, may well be a reverse situation...


 * 2303



Reserve dictators?
OTL in many postsoviet republics in power are, in fact, dictators, such as Nursultan Nazarbayev in Kazakhstan, Alexander Lukashenko in Belorussia, Saparmurat Niyazov in Turkmenia, Heydar Aliyev in Azerbaidzhan,  Islam Karimov in Uzbekistan, Emomali Rahmonov in Tadzhikistan. And what will be with tham in NU, where 2 5-years term - constitutionally set limit? My ideas about this:

1) Lukashenko - he comes to power in 1995, when сountry going through economic crisis, and were large protests in society. So, TTL his chanses for presidency are not so great... I think he can be leader of the Hardlain Communists, more popular than the corruption scandals tarnished Zyuganov. He also can be HC cadidat for Union President elections

2) Nazarbayev - he is from Party bosses of CPSU. So, he can be Kazakh president in 1991-2001. Also he can be one of the biggest political figures in USSR - OTL he was leader of Eurasian Mowement - Social-Democratic and semi-nationalistic (Eurasian Nationalistic) mowement for reconstruction oF the Union. He also can do this thing in TTL

Soviet ruble
OTL proporsals of 1996


 * Where did you find these? I had no idea Russia proposed to change their currency design. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 14:29, July 7, 2011 (UTC)


 * Here

http://e-gallery.guelman.ru/authors/kitaeva/

My ideas:


 * Peresvet/Michael Egorov and Meliton Kantaria (Warfare)


 * Ermak/ ( eastward expansion/exploration?)


 * /Papanin (Polar exploration)


 * / (literature/philosophy/poetry?) - simple 2 greatest figures of Russian culture - Founding Fathers of Russian science (Lomonosov) and poetry (Pushkin)


 * Herzen/Berdyaev (Philosophy)


 * Nestor/Klyuchevskii(History)

2303


 * Hope you don't mind, but I cleaned up your list. I also just realized the pattern in the currency design, so hope you also don't mind me putting the category next to the list. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 21:50, July 10, 2011 (UTC)


 * Update: Found the Р 100! I believe it is Pushkin, but I can't be sure.


 * We forgot, that it will be Soviet, not only Russian rouble
 * So, proporsals with persons from another republics:


 * Pushkin/Omar Khayyam
 * Avicenna/Pirogov
 * Ulugbek/Tsiolkovsky
 * Ivan Fedorov/Francis Scaryna

No North Korea?
Months ago, I proposed a possibility that North Korea could potentially move towards a less-hardliner ideology (more or less like OTL China). But recently, I got suggestions from an IP user and Yankovic suggesting a new scenario. Both the USA and USSR realize that the Kims are too "out of sync" to remain in power, that it is agreed to unite to remove him.

I am coming out to state that... I LOVE THIS IDEA!! Not just for a more peaceful Korea, but for the fact that this is a good example for what I wanted this timeline to be... American-Soviet friendship. It's not like both countries have every done this before, but the fact that both work together seems too good for me to pass up. But my only question would be how would this work out. When would the US-SU agree to do this, how would it be executed, and what would be the overall outcome of the peninsula. Would it only lead to the North adopting a more-democratic government and remain separate, or would we see the Korean Reunification happen? And if the reunification were to happen, would it mimic Germany (meaning it would be the South that simply annexes the North), or something different. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 14:52, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

One problem: China. They wouldn't allow them to do it. Lordganon 18:54, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

The North Koreans are too unpredictable. The Chinese must have more reliable allies than them. And they are not true Marxists. Their government, especially the hereditary sucession of power, makes them effectively a neo-feudal government with communist pretentions. And for all we know we could write about a diplomatic incident that cools relations between the two countries. That would give the Soviet-American coalition the perfect moment to strike.

Yank 23:12, July 8, 2011 (UTC)


 * More or less... I was going to mention that if this were a joint CIA-KGB ploy, than China would most likely not know about it until after the fact. The only think I would see China in is helping to determine the future of North Korea. --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 00:46, July 9, 2011 (UTC)

I rather doubt that they would have a more reliable ally, but that's not even the issue in that regard. Simply put, the Chinese wouldn't accept a state without their interests on that border, especially with the "New Union" going on. Even if they have a cooling with NK that would be the case.

They may not know about it in advance - though I doubt that, things like a Coup are pretty hard to hide unless the people in charge are fools, which while in many regards the Kims are/were, in this case they wouldn't be - but anything of that sort, and China would be over the border, probably within hours. Simply put, if it's not on terms that China agrees with - which is obviously not the case - it wouldn't fly.

Lordganon 13:00, July 9, 2011 (UTC)

What if Kim Jong-Il was killed before the coup starts? Regardless on whatever the Chinese want, no one can reinstall a dead man.

Yank 17:29, July 9, 2011 (UTC)


 * Forgive me for continuing to endorse this idea, but I will continue to look into this idea until I feel it is impossible. Anyway, I came across an article which tells of a failed coup. From what I can make of it, there was a coup around 1993, which came from the turmoil that North Korea was at the time, plus out of fear that the government was launching missiles and forming a nuclear program (which we now know is true). The coup was done by several military officials, but the failure caused several to flee the nation, where this story came out. I can see that if any spies of Russia knew about this, or even revealed any plot to the highest authorities (such as Yeltsin), it probably would have been ignored due to the turmoil that Russia was going threw. But with the USSR still existing, the KGB still operating, and Gorbachev's views in Korea (forming relations with the South just years prior), maybe the USSR, or more likely the official of the KGB, would hear about the plot prior to its taking (I'm sure KGB would have worked in NK), and maybe even offers to assist the conspirators (seeing the benefits that would come from the end of Kim Il-Sung. If it looks like the North Koreans did the coup, than neighboring China would have very little to do, excluding assisting government officials flee the country or retake the country. Any thoughts? --NuclearVacuum (Talk) 18:23, July 9, 2011 (UTC)

One problem there, Nuke - nothing in that article has ever really been confirmed to have happened. Given that there has been defectors, and spies in NK, since and nothing else, I'm inclined to think that the person was exaggerating or something of the like. Someone likely just thought about it, and bit the bullet as a result.

The KGB couldn't do something like that without approval from Gorby. Besides that, NK is so secretive that I have to doubt that anyone has good intel, even the KGB.

China would likely have, at the time and given the changes in the USSR, invaded in such an event. The army would likely have supported it in NK.

As for Jong's death somehow making a difference, he had brothers, simply put.

Lordganon 00:32, July 10, 2011 (UTC)

What if North Korea still exists, but under someone else's control? And what if the new regime continue the relationship with China? It's the best solution, as everyone profits from it (especially the North Korean citizens). After all, does North Korea really need Kim Jong-Il and his family to be close allies with China?

Yank 22:30, July 10, 2011 (UTC)

No, they don't, but any scenario that has them going away isn't plausible. If it helps any, his family is apparently more sane than he is, so there would be positive effects overall. Lordganon 02:57, July 11, 2011 (UTC)