Talk:Socialist Siberia (1983: Doomsday)

Archive

Gorbach(o)v?
Is this Mikhail Gorbachev, or Gorbachov? --DarthEinstein 00:41, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry,my bad,yes,it is Gorbachev. And if you have any suggestion about who would be the leader here,let me know,because,even if it is possible that he survived,I'm having difficulty finding it plausible.--Vladivostok 04:01, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Here are the members of the Politburo (the governing body of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, that's what you call "Andropov's inner circle" I guess) on September 26th, 1983:


 * Viktor Grishin (the party leader of Moscow)
 * Dinmukhamed Kunayev (the party leader of Kazakhstan)
 * Vladimir Shcherbitskiy (the party leader of Ukraine)
 * Yuriy Andropov (the party leader of the Soviet Union)
 * Andrey Gromyko (the Foreign Minister)
 * Grigoriy Romanov (the party leader of Leningrad)
 * Dmitriy Ustinov (the Defense Minister)
 * Konstantin Chernenko (important party functionary; very sick)
 * Nikolay Tikhonov (the Prime Minister)
 * Mikhail Gorbachev (the Chairman of the Legislative Proposals Committee)
 * Geydar Aliyev (the First Deputy Prime Minister of the Soviet Union; the future president of Azerbaijan)

Kunayev seems to be the most likely to survive. — Hellerick 12:35, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow,that's a long list,thanks for the info. Please,feel free to comment on what I've been trying to write about in the article. I'd welcome any suggestions.--Vladivostok 20:17, October 21, 2009 (UTC)


 * The Alaskan war is nonsense — Alaska should either come into the Siberians' hands peacefully, or it should not belong to Siberia at all. — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 10:28, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * If the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic was restored, there is no sense in calling it "Provisional". — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 10:28, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what the term "Premier" stands for. The title of the head of the Soviet Union was "the General (or the First) Secretary of the Communist Party". The closest office to a premier's was the one of the "President of the Cabinet Council" but he did not have very much power. — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 10:28, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * The premier is only a stand in title for now,because I still need to find a suitable leader. The Alaska thing somewhat difficult to agree with,but since it was canon for so long,I thought everyone would want to keep it that way,I can easily move that. The provisional is there because it does not control all the territory it claims and is only a stand-in government of the Russian part of the USSR. Kunayev seems like a part of the old rule and not someone who would try to reform the state and i don't know if I should make him the General Secretary.I also have doubts about the name. Would anyone mind if just changed the name back to the USSR? And thanks for the advice,I'll try and make the article more believable.--Vladivostok 12:59, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Mir and all things Space
Vlad, I appreciate your desire to flesh out the SSSR, but I must argue against the idea of anything space oriented at this point -- the world is just barely getting on its feet. In my understanding of the timeline, we're going to be lucky to have any sort of space program functional before the 2020's because of everything that's sorting out on the world's surface. Yes, there may be satellite launches, but with war brewing around the world, I think that the SSSR will likely be helping to put out the brush-fire wars instead of going into space. Louisiannan 21:24, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah,I knew when I was writing this part of the article that it was a bit over the top. Perhaps just the joint GPS system i mentioned? It would make communication a bit easier. And do you think that I should just rename it the USSR officially,now that i have already altered most of the article?--Vladivostok 13:01, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * I could see the world community starting the GPS system at this point. I don't think it would be in place before the 2020's, just given the level of recovery the world has faced.  As for the name, I think that at some level they would want to distance themselves internationally from the USSR, given that the USSR is what put them into this mess in the first place. Louisiannan 15:53, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well,why not? Tomorrow I'll incorporate that a GPS tipe network is in early stages of development,loose the Moon part,maybe just a few probes to the Moon and make Mir a future joint plan of the LoN,since Mir stands for both peace and world in Russian and I think that would be a nice touch. I'm not that imaginative when it comes to names,so I'll just rename the Soviet Union into the Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics. That way,I keep the USSR acronym and it gives them a fresh start.--Vladivostok 16:26, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * I think they'd want to lose the USSR acronym. Why don't we keep the name of Soviet Socialist Siberia for the whole country, with all the constituent republics, even though it's a bit of a misnomer. --DarthEinstein 20:15, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Why would Siberians want to lose something which symbolized the golden age for them? — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 09:33, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * Because... they blew the world up? --DarthEinstein 16:24, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * They either don't know how it's happened and blame America, or they know how it happened and blame a stupid mistake. — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 16:32, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh very well. I just liked the idea of both of the superpowers being destroyed. --DarthEinstein 16:50, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * I would rather not to have the USSR here too. Siberia should be claiming that its aim is to restore the Soviet Union, but it shouldn't claim that it has already succeeded in it. — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 17:34, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * So maybe they would call themselves the Provisional Union of Soviet Survivors... or something else. I just made that up on the spot. --DarthEinstein 17:42, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * It's funny how,just now,I changed a bunch of things in the article. Maybe I'll just change the name into the Union of Sovereign Republics or States,whichever one is better,even though keeping the acronym,or the name for that matter, would not necessarily make the entire world hate them for that. Whether they change their name or not,they're still the country which started Doomsday,no going back from that mistake. I didn't change the name of the article just yet,but I have changed a few things about the space program,to make it more plausible. And the more I think about it,the more the Alaska thing bugs me to,I'd really need to find one hell of a good reason for the USSR to attack it--Vladivostok 20:21, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * The oil. If "free" Alaska is still using the pipeline, then there must be plenty of oil up there. With the status of the Middle East uncertain at best, you would think Siberia would want access to Alaskan oil. They could say that they're "liberating" Alaska for whatever reason, when they truly want access to the oil.--BrianD 16:43, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well,I kind of went with simply that they were uneasy about the APA having a still functioning state near by,even though it only had a symbolic hold over it. Since it happened rather early,I placed it in 1988-89,they were a bit intimidated. Resources could be a secondary reason.--Vladivostok 16:55, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

Aliyev for President
How about making Geydar Aliyev the leader of Siberia? He was 60 at the moment of the catastrophe, but still very active (he died in 2003 still being the president of Azerbaijan).

In the OTL Gorbachev was chosen over him for to main reasons:


 * Gorbachev was younger (the members of the Politburo understood that they are too old and were determined to stop the sequence of frequent deaths of the highest Soviet officials).


 * Aliyev was an Azerbaijani (and Armenians would never tolerate an Azerbaijani to rule them).

But now after the Doomsday both reasons are gone (Gorbachev and most Armenians are most likely killed). Plus being a Muslim and of Turkic origin would help Aliyev to make Uyghuristan an ally of his country. — Hellerick 17:20, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds good,but one main problem that I was thinking of solving tomorrow is to find someone who would run the USSR now.Aliyev is good historically,but someone younger would need to run it after him,and that's my main problem. And,btw,was he reformist or a hardliner? And to refer to the whole USSR being here and all:it isn't a superpower anymore. None of the nations here can be called superpowers just yet. And,let's face it:the Soviet Union had the most chance to survive in some form. It had an extremely large landmass, the US nuclear warheads were smaller and more tactical than the Soviet ones. Plus,by sending their ICBM's first,their people had a greater chance for survival. Them surviving,in one form or another, is a perfectly logical assumption.--Vladivostok 21:00, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

Was Aliyev a reformist or a hardliner? I guess neither of that. He was a... uhm, very adaptable person who always could make the best out of a situation he was in. He was a communist when it gave him advantages, he was a capitalist when it seemed more suitable, he was a nationalist when he had to be one. He always thought a about his personal benefit, he always was accused in corruption, and he made sure that after his death his own son would become the next president. I don't mean that he did not care about what he was ruling, in fact he was a rather effective leader, but I don't think he stuck to any kind of ideology. He could be anything he believed he had to be.

BTW, where you got the information about US washeads being "smaller and more tactical" from? — Hellerick 04:50, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm,I guess I must have taken something out of context with the whole smaller warhead thing,my bad,but the point remains,a large landmass,you can't destroy everything and Siberia would probably be less emphasized on than the European part or Kazakhstan. I like the Aliyev thing,it isn't a cliche Gorbachev choice,but would he survive the nuclear war? And do we agree on the scope of destruction in the USSR or Siberia,or whatever it's going to be called. Do you think that most of the cities I mentioned as functioning would survive? Do they have any strategic value?--Vladivostok 06:00, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

In this timeline Aliyev's first name would be transliterated from Russian, not from Azerbaijani (Geydar Aliyevich Aliyev, not Heydar Alirza oglu Aliyev). Azerbaijani did not have its own Latin orthography yet anyway. And I believe he would die sooner — due to radiation poisoning he experienced in 1983, and lack and underdevelopment of medicine in this timeline. Let's presume that he would die in 1999, while Tuleyev-led "regency council" would have de-facto power since about 1995. — Hellerick 02:37, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

Basic information
I was thinking of what to leave in the current article and what to change and I hope that these ideas could remain: --Vladivostok 13:45, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * the territory size:it's just a rough estimate of the territory still under the control of the USSR
 * the population size:the large influx of refugees would account for the current number
 * the name:I'd like to name it either the Union of Soviet Sovereign Republic or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, either way,the Siberian name has to go,it is a bit inaccurate to keep the current name
 * the Republics in the USSR: does anyone object to the current list,and if so,why do you think they wouldn't join the USSR
 * Aliyev: I'd like to make him the first leader after Doomsday,he had a higher post than Gorbachev and Gorbachev seems a bit to much of a cliche. The current leaders could be any number of current,like Alexander Khloponin and the current president or prime minister of Mongolia,owing to the number of Mongolians in the Union in this TL
 * capital: if anyone has a better city than Krasnoyarsk,I'd like to hear their ideas.


 * Krasnoyarsk is likely to be nuked actually. It was a "closed city" (i.e. no foreign people were allowed to visit it) with some secret plants working for the military (secret for everyone but CIA of course). Plus there were other important targets in the region — the Krasnoyarsk Hydroelectric Dam (probably the most powerful in the Soviet Union at that time, since the Sayano-Shushenskaya Dam was not completed yet), and Krasnoyarsk-26 (a "city within a mountain", kinda Soviet version of Cheyenne Mountain) is located close to it.
 * Khloponin is unlikely to hold any offices; he's product of the capitalist Russia, starting as a businessman — he most likely would be arrested for speculation on the black market or something. (OMG, he was born in Sri Lanka?! I did not know that.)
 * Hm... Probably Aman Tuleyev would be an okay person for the next president. At the moment of the catastrophe he was the head of the Novokuznetsk Railway Branch, and the reconstruction of the Transsiberian Railroad would be one of the most important questions after the war, thus helping him to climb quickly within the Soviet hierarchy. In the OTL he was an important Russian politician of the early 1990s (a leftist), he ran for president of Russia twice (1991 and 1995), and he remains the head of Kemerovo Oblast since 1990. Plus his being of Tatar and Kazakh descent would make him a kind successor in Aliyev's Turkic Islamic political "dynasty". — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 16:11, October 24, 2009 (UTC)
 * If I understood a few articles I read about the nuclear complex and Krasnoyarsk-26,the real city of Krasnoyarsk wasn't closed down and the secret city was located almost 65 kilometers south from the real one. The dam is also located 30 kilometars to the north of the city. Perhaps the city itself wouldn't be targeted. And if it was,well,a malfunctioning rocket will serve well to explain it's staying intact. If Canberra wouldn't be targeted and Glasgow's missile malfunctioned, why wouldn't an American rocket malfunction or not be sent at all? Just a thought.Tuleyev would seem likely but I wanted Khloponin because he was younger and more liberal so making some reforms that I mentioned would make him a more likely candidate. I was also thinking of adding some reforms similar to Lenin's NEP,stimulating small businesses.--Vladivostok 07:51, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Krasnoyarsk was closed for foreigners, Krasnoyarsk-26 was closed for every one, even for Soviet citizens.
 * Khloponin had nothing to do with Krasnoyarsk — he did not live in the city until he was elected its governor. Mind you, I would rather be glad to see him in this timeline — he's an okay person and a good manager, its just I can't imagine how a person who started his business "stonewashing" blue jeans (to make them look fashionable) could become a leader of a Soviet state. — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 08:52, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

Well,maybe chance or skill could have given him the opportunity to rise in the ranks of the USSR. I'm not fixed on the idea, I just want a younger,liberal person to take over the country to enact some sort of reforms. And one more thing:if you know any good map-making programs,and where i could get that blank political map that the TL uses as it's main map,I'd appreciate it. The article can't have this map anymore,a few changes need to be made. And on a side note,why does that Doomsday report map have a nuclear missile that exploded to the far north in Siberia? Why would anyone want to bomb that?--Vladivostok 08:59, October 25, 2009 (UTC)


 * Probably it was a nuclear submarines base or something (even though I suppose it was too late to try to destroy them). But most likely the one who drew the map thought that the north looked too blank.
 * Well I can make the maps, e.g. I have made the maps for my country San Lorenzo, and the map of Siberia for the article in Wikipedia was made by me too. But I have to know what has to be drawn.
 * The current map of Siberia shows that only the very north of West Siberia is controlled by the Siberians - but it does not look credible. The nuked map does not show any nuclear strikes in the central areas of the West Siberia (OTL's Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug; there are no targets to be nuked), and this area is the main Russian source of the natural oil and gas. Even if the area is a subject to some nuclear contamination, it's still worth of being recolonized. — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 09:41, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly,they wouldn't just pack up an leave,nothing was hit. The new map should show the three regions of provisional Kazakhstan I added(namely Pavlodar,East and North Kazakhstan),even though Navi told me recently that it would be hit by bombs because it was full of ICBM silos. Our Doomsday map doesn't show any destruction,and I was simply thinking of not taking that into account as he didn't actually tell me where he found that information and I couldn't find it. He suggested territory in the middle of Kazakhstan,but that would overextend the country and make it look rather silly. It should also have at least the north and central parts of Xinjiang,specifically areas rich with gas. Mongolia can stay the way it is now. Alaska too,event though I know you hate the idea of it being part of the USSR. and I'm not quite sure about Manchuria and Korea. Maybe small dots indicating bases in the area? And should there be inner borders to indicate the Republics?--Vladivostok 10:36, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

Well, I guess Navi was right about Kazakhstan. It would be struck by short-range missiles from China.

Probably there should be a difference between the Republics, and the Territories (not under members of the union, but with military presence of the Soviets, still under martial law, with their natural resource being exploited).

The Union (whatever its official name could be) could consist of:


 * The Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic
 * The Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic
 * The People's Republic of Mongolia
 * The Sino-Uyghur Socialist Republic
 * The Alaskan Autonomous Territory (with weak local civil administration)
 * The Urals Territory (West Siberia and the extreme north of the European Russia)
 * The Turkestan Territory (the areas of the former Central Asian republics of the USSR, unsuitable for repopulation, but under resource exploitation)

The enclaves within the republics that are unsuitable for repopulation due to radioactive contamination would be designated as "zones", with their status similar to the territories (the Irkutsk Zone etc.) — Hellerick 13:08, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well,you're bent on getting rid of the provisional part in the names,aren't you?=) I like the idea,I'll change the names of the provisional parts and rearrange a couple of things tonight,if I'll have the time to do so. Just not sure if I should make any more special pages on the specific parts of the Union,at least not until we get the main page in order. I'm not sure about the Sino part in the Uyghur Republic. The Chinese would be mad,having lost their country,while the Uyghurs,since Xinjiang wasn't hit and were "liberated" by the war would be grateful, I doubt that that many Chinese would stay so as to have a say in the name. Adding Turkestan territory would be something to consider,but would probably be represented on the map with dots,seeing as it would be too large a territory for them to control just yet. The Sino part could be areas controlled in Manchuria,again,represented by dots,as it wouldn't be an integral part of the Union--Vladivostok 13:29, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no point in calling "provisional" something which is not supposed to be dissolved later. Probably the union government is "provisional", but not the republics I mentioned.
 * About the Chinese-Uyghur issue. According to this source in 1983 the Chinese made up 40% of the population of Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and about 75% of the population of its capital, the city of Urumqi. After the influx of refugees, the percentage of the Chinese would increase. I don't think this territory could become completely Uyghuri-dominated. It would be important to keep balance between both ethnic groups. Well of course we always can call it "Uyghuri-Chinese Socialist Republic" instead. — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 16:46, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
 * Very well,in a couple of hours I'll add some history,rename a couple states in the Siberian page,look at a couple of candidates for the current leader,etc,etc. The Turkestan part of the Union would,I think,be a bit much. I mean,that's simply too much territory to control right now. Even though the eastern part of Kazakhstan would have been bombed,I think that it would still be a viable place for a government to form. We already have a lot of places that survived that were in blast areas in the TL,this would only be a small part.--Vladivostok 17:04, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

Name
If you want to drop one word from the name of the Union you, drop "soviet" not "socialist". Only two of the republics were Soviet, but all the four were "Socialist". The Mongolians and the Chinese would not want their countries to be "Sovietised", thus implying that they were absorbed by the old Soviet Union. Therefore I believe it should be "The Union of Sovereign Socialist Republics". — Hellerick 07:47, October 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well,I was using Gorbachev's planned name for the Union that was supposed to come after the USSR OTL,but I guess that that wouldn't apply now. Should I finally move the article,or do I have to talk to Mitro or Xi'Reney?--Vladivostok 07:52, October 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * The name Gorbachev suggested was Содружество Суверенных Государств, the Commonwealth of Sovereign States — neither Soviet nor Socialist.
 * Come to think of it, probably the full name should be The Commonwealth of Sovereign Socialist Republics — the Russian abbreviation still would be the same, but the Chinese and the Mongolians would not be as pissed off.
 * Maybe we should not use the full name for the article? It could be named "Socialist Siberia", a colloquial name for the union, while the full name would be mentioned in the infobox. The colloquial name could come from Provisional Administration of Siberia, short-lived predecessor of the Union. — Hellerick [[Image:Flag of Divnogorsk.svg|20px]] 08:19, October 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well,if you look at the Wikipedia article on that proposed Union,it was to be named the Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics, and no mention of any Commonwealth.I'd like to keep the Union part of the name in the infobox,because it is a federation and,unlike OTL USSR,the participating Republics have the right to secede via referendum.
 * As for the article name,I'm not quite sure about keeping it. I mean,why would the rest of the world still call them "Socialist Siberia",if they know for a fact that it has these other participating Republics?--Vladivostok 08:33, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right, the main proposed name was "Union of Sovereign States". But "Commonwealth of Sovereign States" is used in some documents. It looks like while the situation was getting loose, the name evolved: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics > Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics > Union of Sovereign States > Commonwealth of Sovereign States > Commonwealth of Independent States.

unlike OTL USSR,the participating Republics have the right to secede via referendum. — Hey, the republics of the OTL USSR did have the right to secede! Article 72 of the 1977 Constitution stated that: "Each Union Republic shall retain the right freely to secede from the USSR." It's just when the Baltian republics attempted to use this right, the Union authorities turned out to be very unwilling to fulfill it.

So, you think "Siberia" is the name of the Russian part only? I think it could be informal name for whole Union (like the Soviet Union was called Soviet Russia sometimes). — Hellerick 07:48, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * True,I should have mentioned that I knew that in real life they had the right to secede. But what I was trying to say was that the USSR was unwilling to let any Republic go because it was centralized and would probably crush any opposition. Obviously in the Soviet Unions prime and not in the late eighties. So,Socialist Siberia,huh? I could live with that,if we both agree,simply change the name of the article after you read this. Btw,how's the map going? I think I'll try to rework the Census of 2001 part next. Do you think that circa 32 million is a reasonable number? I think it's fairly pessimistic, considering the Chinese and other refugees.--Vladivostok 09:01, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

Fourteen missiles
I understand that Siberia was low-importance compared with the land west of the Urals, but that number nevertheless feels very, very low.

I really like the changes you have made and am excited to finally be reading them! Quesiton: was ShutUpNavi in any way involved in these sweeping changes to his part of the world? To tell the truth I haven't been able to follow the discussions. Benkarnell 11:20, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Alaska invasion
I had thought the new consensus was that the people of western Alaska turned to the Soviets for aid, with nowhere else to go. That does make more sense. Because why would the ANZUS pact (there was no ANZC yet, properly speaking) "remain neutral" in so clear a violation of the sovereignty of one of their members? It was a mutual defense pact - the one circumstance in which it would never remain neutral would be a clear invasion. Benkarnell 11:40, November 2, 2009 (UTC)